
Class 



Copyiiglit]^ " ; , 



CDEQUGHT DEPOSHi 



AGRICULTURAL AND BIOLOGICAL PUBLICATIONS 
CHARLES V. PIPER, Consulting Editor 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



^k 




^^ 




raw-OJillBook (h, 7% 



PUBLISHERS OF BOOKS FO FL-/ 

Coal Age '=' Electric Railway Journal 
Electrical World '=' Engineering News-Record 
American Machinist '^ Ingenierfa Intemacional 
Engineering S Mining Journal "^ Power 
Chemical 6 Metallurgical Engineering 
Electrical Merchandising 





Original headquarters of the Federal Office of Farm Management, United States 
Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. 

Frontispiece 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



A TEXT-BOOK 

FOR 

STUDENT, INVESTIGATOR, AND INVESTOR 



r/i/adams 

PROFESSOR OF FARM MANAGEMENT, UNIVERSITT OF CALIFORNIA 



First Edition 



McGRAW-HILL BOOK COIMPANY, Inc. 
NEW YORK: 370 SEVENTH AVENUE 

LONDON: 6 & 8 BOUVERIE ST., E. C. 4 

1921 



c^^^^ 






\\ 



Copyright, 1921, by the 
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. 



DEC 12 1921 



THK MAPLK PKESS YORK PA 

©CIA630704 



PREFACE 

The business of farming is complex and almost infinitely diverse. 
At the outset both the observer of its conditions and the collector of its 
data face variations between the widest extremes not only of soil, water, 
climate, topography, and size of holdings, but also of individual opinions, 
experiences, practices, and ideals. 

For instance, the man so situated that possible crops are apples, 
peaches, oranges, lemons, walnuts, or lima beans will reap different 
rewards from one who can raise only alfalfa or grain, or who is confined 
to buckwheat, rye, wild grasses, or pasture. Distance to and receptivity 
of the market are other influences, and affect in a marked way such 
things as vegetables, poultry products, berries, whole milk, and to a lesser 
extent, grains, beans, potatoes, pork, beef, and sheep. For the same 
crops there are variations in yield because of differences in soil type, 
climatic condition, age of planting, choice of variety, availableness of 
water, need of drainage, presence of alkali, market conditions, and farm- 
ing method. 

The necessity to provide a proper standard of living is the basis upon 
which all financial estimates must stand. It is the keynote to a discus- 
sion of the financial side of agriculture. Yet ideas differ widely as to 
what sum is needed to provide proper living for the average family. 
These differences may arise from (a) size of families, (h) age of members 
of the family, (c) standards of living demanded by different nationalities, 
(d) conditions of environment in which childhood was spent, (e) personal 
tastes as to what are proper social obligations, and (/) the degree of 
spending activity of various members of the family. VThus the comforts 
of one family will be the luxuries of a second and the necessities of a third. 

Or again, the great variation in the characteristics of operators plays 
a most important part in determining the degree of success which will 
attend any farming enterprise. Compare, for example, the individual 
who admits he has been thirty-five years on a rented hay ranch, during 
a time when agriculture in its many changes has offered exceptional 
opportunities for advancement, with the man who, taking advantage 
of these opportunities, has amassed a modest fortune. Or, yet again, 
the man who is getting rich on a hundred acres of level, heavy- 
producing land, offers a striking contrast to the man losing money oh a 
thousand acres of poor land. 



viii PREFACE 

There is the man who watches details but is weak on organization; 
there is the man capable of organizing his work and considering broad 
policies, but neglectful of details. There is the well-balanced man. 
There is the man who, failing on a hundred sixty acres, could succeed 
on twenty acres, and there is his opposite, the hundred sixty-acre man 
whose activities are cramped when confined to twenty acres. 

Therefore, this text can be only representative. It cannot include 
all practices, all principles. In our present knowledge we are rather 
counting milestones than looking back from the final goal. Our subject 
as one for scientific inquiry is new; our information is fragmentary and 
full of gaps. If everyone devoted to agricultural inquiry should wait for 
the completion of his chosen labor, nothing would be published. This 
book is written in the earnest hope that it will stimulate the writing of 
better ones as fresh knowledge is added to what we already possess. 

If it should appear that the text runs more to data for the beginner 
and the settler in new sections, it should be remembered that to such 
farmers the principles of management are calculated to be of greatest 
value in guiding to right procedure and in helping to proper decisions. 
Old-established farms have many of their problems worked out. Never- 
theless, since each enterprise demands constant individual study and 
often deserves reorganization, let us hope that this book will be worth 
while even to old hands in agriculture in showing them by way of contrast 
what others are doing. 

In using this text, the reader will bear in mind that the attempt is 
largely to show the scope of farm management by illustration. This 
leaves the way open for the replacement of the general illustrative ma- 
terial by more detailed or more recent data clearly applicable to a given 
region, or even to a given farm. Agriculture varies so throughout the 
United States that a general text on Farm Management must at best, as 
already indicated, be suggestive rather than final. In teaching and 
following farm management the need is for basic presentation of method 
and principle, rather than for the accumulation of facts for local use. 
The latter is easy but would fill a thousand volumes. That this book 
will serve a general need is the hope of the author. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND CREDIT 

This book, to a large measure, owes its compilation to the conscien- 
tious and painstaking work of Mr. T. R. Kelley who, out of the goodness 
of his heart, has reviewed the original manuscript, made substantial 
recommendations, and offered constant encouragement. To him the 
author publicly acknowledges his deepest thanks and appreciation for 
ever ready and unstinted help. 

The work of other farm managers and of agricultural economists, the 
experiences of farmers, and the findings of students and investigators, 
have also aided in the preparation of this text. To these the author 
expresses his thanks. He is especially indebted to the writings of Messrs. 
W. J. Spillman, G. F. Warren, Andrew Boss, H. C. Taylor. Many 
publications have been drawn upon, ample reference to which is made 
in the chapter of references. 

A number of the photographs appearing in the text are from the files 
of the federal Office of Farm Management. 

References 

References, indicated by key numbers throughout, are condensed 
in the concluding chapter. This method results in a partial bibliography 
of farm management and in freedom from breaks in the text. 



CONTENTS 

PART I 

CHAPTER I 

Page 

General Considerations of Farm Management 1 

Definition of Farm Management — The Object and Scope of Management — 
Management vs. Agricultural Economics — Financial Success Usual Farm 
Management Measure — Financial Test is General — Basic Knowledge of 
Agricultural Sciences and Practices Precedes Farm Management — Typical 
Questions — Graphic Presentation of the Place of Farm Management — Chart 
Arrangement Arbitrary but Valuable — Use of Management a Personal 
Matter — Management Constantly Changing — Use of Management in Actual 
Farming — Object of Studying Management — Fundamentals of Management 
— Time Element in Studying Management — Field Studies Should Supple- 
ment Printed Matter — Terms Used in Connection with Capital — Terms Used 
in Connection with Income — Terms Used in Connection with Expenses — 
Terms Used in Connection with Occupancy of Land — Terms Used in Con- 
nection with Labor — Terms Used in Connection with Crops — Terms L^sed in 
Connection with Live Stock — Illustrating Use of Terms. 

CHAPTER II 

Selecting Farming as an Occupation 17 

Stability of Farming — Farming a Mode of Life — Two Ways to Consider 
Farming — Management Draws on Many Sources for Information — Scope of 
Detailed Information Needed — Local Practice the Result of Experience — 
Gaining Kxiowledge of Local Conditions — Getting Experience. 

CHAPTER III 

Selecting the Farm Business 31 

Locality Limitations — Capital Limitations — Income Limitations— Personal 
IncUnation — Studying the Personal Factor — When a Choice is Possible — 
Examples of Conditions Limiting the Industry — Agricultural Regions of the 
United States — Tabulating Locality Possibilities and Limitations — Example 
of Locality Limitations and Possibilities — Extensive Farming More Stable — 
Summary of Factors Determining Desirability of a Farm Enterprise — 
Established Sections Have Advantages — Diversified vs. Specialized Farming 
— Comparison of General and Specialized Farming — Tendency is Toward 
Specialized Farming — Survey Findings — General Farming More Exacting — 
General Farming for Beginners. 

CHAPTER IV 

Selecting the Farm. '. 55 

When to Rent — Selecting the Right Land — Prices Sometimes too High — 
Choice of Farm a Personal Matter — Turning to Established Sections — 
Finding the Farm — Factors to Consider when Selecting a Farm — Personal 
— Earning Capacity — Physical Factors — The Shape of the Farm — Farm 



xii CONTENTS 

Paoe 
Arrangement — ^Topography — Soil Quality — Physical Properties — Health- 
fulness — Improvements — Water Supply for Family and Live Stock — Ease 
and Cost of Upkeep — Maj-kets — Waste Lands — Percentage of Improved 
Land in United States — Effect of Highways on Acreage — Permanent an'd 
Temporary Waste — Woodland — Poor Pasture — Relation of Use to Price — 
Labor, Social and Financial Factors — Labor — Neighbors — Financial — 
Financial Test for Proposed Farm Proposition — Inherent Possibilities — In- 
fluence of Rise in Land Prices — Elements of the Successful Farm — Relative 
Value a Personal Matter — Size of the Farm — The "Minimum Efficient 
Unit" — Minimum Efficient Unit Relatively Small — Ideal Size — Acreage 
Required to Produce Given Income — Size of Farms to Provide Labor Incomes 
of $500 to $700 — Returns Other than Labor Income — Other Examples and 
Sizes — Actual Examinations and Report — The Actual Examination of the 
Farm — Preparing Report — Preparing Report is Interesting — Score Cards — 
Valuing Farm Lands for Purchase — Factors Determining Land Values — 
Land Values and Returns — Estimating Home Value of Farm Lands — 
Estimating Productive Value of Farm Lands — Potential Values of Farm 
Lands — Good and Bad I.ands — Buying and Selling Farm Lands — Abstract 
of Title — Certificate of Title— Deed— Selling Contracts. 

CHAPTER V 

Organizing the Farm Business 85 

Advantages of a Farm Plan — Determining the Principal Objective — Neces- 
sity of Knowing Local Practices and Conditions — Tabular Presentation of 
Section Differences in Types of Farming — Local Practice a Guide in Organiz- 
ing the Work — Farm Management Fundamentals — Plan Depends on Out- 
standing Individual Need — Planning to Provide Immediate Capital — Neces- 
sity for Complete Work — Applied to Live-stock Farming — Planning for 
Ultimate Profit — Prodiicing or Purchasing — Choosing the Profitable Enter- 
prise — Planning to Provide a Diversity of Enterprise — Planning to Provide 
Days of Productive Labor — Planning to Reduce Labor Requirements — 
Variation in Labor Needs — Planning to Produce Family and Farm Supplies 
— Planning the Reorganizing of Going Concerns — Planning Special Pro- 
grams — Gathering Data in Planning — Sources of Data. 

CHAPTER VI 

The Soil Factor 113 

\| Success in Farming Depends on Crop-producing Power of the Land — Corre- 
lating Recommendations and Practices — Introducing New Practices — 
Accepting Experiment Station Findings — Ways of Improving Soil Quality — 
Will Improving Soil Quahty Pay? — Rotation of Crops and Cropping Systems 
— Definition of Rotation of Crops — ^Purpose of Rotation of Crops — Crop 
Rotation Presupposes Prepared Plan — Definition of Cropping System — 
Multiplying Cropping Systems — Determining Cropping Systems — Rules for 
Use in Planning Rotations — Example of a Rotation and Cropping System — 
Planning a Field Arrangement for Rotation of Crops — Use of Map in 
Arranging Fields for Crop Rotation — Green Manuring — Definition of Green 
Manure Crops — Purpose of Green Manuring — Determining Need for 
Artificial Inoculation with Bacteria for Legumes — Methods of Introducing 
Bacteria — Definition of Humus — Purpose of Humus — Green Manure Crops 



CONTENTS xiii 

Page 
as Sources of Humus — Value of Plant Foods from Green Manure Crops — 
Commercial Fertilizers — Important Elements — Getting Value from Com- 
mercial Fertilizers — ^How Commercial Fertilizers are Priced — Correctness 
of Analyses — Farm Mixtures vs. Factory Mixtures — High-grade Mate- 
rials Preferable — Stable Manures — Composition — Cash Value — Physical 
Value — Limitations — Cold and Warm Manures — Amount of Stable Manures 
Produced by Live Stock — Handling — Stable Manures Tend to Force Growth 
— Recommendations for Use of Crop Rotations, Commercial Fertilizers 
and Stable Manures — Recommended Crop Rotations — For Farms in Middle 
Latitudes — For Utah, and Georgia — Recommended Green Manures — For 
Farms of the Gulf Coast Region of Alabama, Mississippi, and West Florida — 
For Sandy Lands of Indiana, Michigan and Ohio — For the Coastal Plain — 
Green Manures and Other Fertilizers Recommended for Kentucky and 
Tennessee — Evidence of Improvement from Farm Practice to Increase the 
Crop-producing Power of the Land — Evidence from the Coastal Plain — 
From Kentucky and Tennessee — From the Gulf Coast Region — Actual Farm 
Practices in the Use of Crop Rotation, Commercial Fertilizers, and Stable 
Manures — Rotations in Use by Farmers — Commercial Fertilizers and Stable 
Manures Used by Farmers — Where Use of Fertilizers is not Extensively 
Practiced — Green Manure Crops Used by Farmers — Use of Rotation and 
Manures by Farm Managers. 

CHAPTER VII 

The Calendar of Operations 142 

Definition — Value — Manner of Making — Example of Ivind and Sequence 
of Farm Operations on Selected Crops (Pennsylvania) — Farm Operations 
in Producing Alfalfa (California) — In Producing Peaches (California) — 
Influence of Available Work Days — Graphic Presentations of Calendar of 
Operations — The Calendar of Operations in Connection with Continuous 
Feed for Live Stock. 

CHAPTER VIII 

Choice of Farm Equipment 152 

Factors Governing Selection — Environment a Factor in Determining 
Equipment — Experience Necessary — Justifying Equipment — Justifying 
Farm Buildings, and Individual Structures — Justifying Implements — 
Justifying Special Equipment and Tractors. 

CHAPTER IX 

Building Equipment 161 

Regional Variation in Building Equipment — Good and Bad in Farm Build- 
ings — Studying Proposed Buildings — Procedure in Building — Construction 
Suggestions — Definition of Bill of Materials — Making a Bill of Materials — 
Detailed Plans of Construction — Space Allotment in Buildings — The Farm- 
stead — Definition — Variations — Rearranging Existing Farmsteads — Plan- 
ning — Suggestions — ^Location and Site — Not Necessary to Cramp the Farm 
Building Site — Grouping Buildings — Distance Between Buildings — Lanes — 
Axis of Stock Barns — Location of Silos — Screening Unsightly Structures and 
Accumulations — Confining Poultry and Live Stock — Landscape Effects — 
The Plan on Paper — Details of the Farm Plan Map — Details of the Farm- 
stead Map. 



xiv CONTENTS 

CHAPTER X 

Page 

Fencing, Work Stock, Implements and Machinery 185 

Fencing Equipment — Kinds of Fencing Used in the United States — Type 
of Farming and Size of Farm Determines Fencing — Field Arrangement 
Influences Fencing — Requirements of a Farm Fence — Gates — Life ©f and 
Test for Wire Fencing — Posts — Work Stock — 'Work Animals — Character of 
Farm Work Determines Type of Work Animals — Extremes in Work Animals 
Not Desirable — Poor Work Animals Uneconomical — Mating Teams — 
Working Stock — Number of Work Animals Required — Implements and 
Machinery — Factors Determining Implement and Machinery Equipment — 
Use of a Calendar of Operations in Estimating Implement and Machinery 
Equipment — Implement Needs of Barley — Additional Equipment Needs of 
Other Crops — Value of Calendars of Operations in Determining Implement 
and Machinery Needs— Special and Minor Equipment — What Constitutes 
Minor Equipment — List of Minor Equipment — Additional Minor Equip- 
ment — Costs — Examples of Lists of Total Equipment — Desirability of 
Second-hand Equipment — Determining Value of Second-hand Implements 
and Machinery — Determining Value of Work Animals — Determining Value 
of Dairy Cows — Depreciation Mounts with Age — When Second-hand Equip- 
ment is Especially Worth While — Costs of Equipment — Cost of Equipping a 
20-cow Dairy — State Findings Concerning Costs of Equipping Farms — 
Michigan Costs of Equipping Dairy Farms — Dairy Farm Equipment Costs, 
Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina — Relation of 
Equipment Investments to Returns — Building Equipment Costs, Ohio — 
Total Farm Equipment Costs, Ohio — Costs of Equipping Apple Orchards — 
Equipment Costs as Shown by Farm Management Surveys — Costs of Farm 
Equipment Vary — Example of and Variation in Costs, of Farm Equipment. 

CHAPTER XI 

The Capital Requirements of Farming • 223 

Recognition of Importance of Capital a Safeguard — "Capital" Covers Cash 
and Credit — Credit Expands Farming Opportunities — Wisdom of Determin- 
ing Capital Needs — Capital Needs are Variable — Factors Affecting Capital 
Requirements of Farming — Individual Determinations Necessary — Estimat- 
ing and Grouping Capital Needs — Variation in Possible RetuiTis — Conserva- 
tism Should Rule in Estimating Possible Returns — Care in Estimating Items 
of Family Expense — Tabulating Capital Requirements — Method^Pre- 
cautions to be Observed in Determining — The Safety Factor in Estimating — 
Capital Requirements Vary with the Business — Amount and Division of 
Farm Expenses as Indicating Capital Requirements — Amount and Distri- 
bution of Farm Expenses, Pennsylvania, Utah Lake Valley, Corn Belt, 
Georgia — Capital Requirements of Farming, As Owner — Classification 
As Owner, Ohio — Capital Requirements of Apple Orchards — Capital 
Required by Irrigation Farmers — Costs for 20-acre, 40-acre, and 160-acre 
Farm — Capital for California Farms — Capital Requirements of Tenant 
Farming — Capital LTnder Tenanting Compared with Owning, California — 
Effect of Type of Farm Business upon Capital — Desirability of Testing 
Capital Requirements Wlien a Choice of Business is Possible — Sources of 
Capital — Factors which Influence Terms on Farm-mortgage Loans — Bank- 
ing — Advantages — Using Banking Credit — Crop and Stock Mortgages — 
Use of Credit — Amortization Method of Paying Loans — Prevailing Interest 
Rates — Range — Legal Interest Rates and Statutes of Limitations. 



CONTENTS XV 

CHAPTER XII 

Page 

Farm Profits 257 

What the Business Should Pay— Other Ideas of Profit — The Business Should 
be Credited with All Production — Productive, Speculation and Home 
Values — Reference to Determination of Land Values — Deductions for Home 
and Speculative Values — Interest upon Operating Capital — Charge for 
Management — The Sinking Fund — Depreciation Charge — Examples of 
Estimating What a Farm Business Should Pay — Reasons for Demanding 
Full Returns of the Farm Business — Labor Income as a Measure of Profits — 
Findings Concerning Farm Profits from Farm Management Surveys — In- 
comes as Tenant or Owner — Sums Available, per Acre, Above Operating 
Expenses, 34 California Crops, 1915 and 1919 Data — Examples of Large 
Returns from Farming — California Examples of Farm Profits — Value of 
Perquisites — Determined Value of Perquisites — Family Needs as Found in 
Georgia — Living Costs in Minnesota — Family Living an Important Item — 
Value of Family Living in a Number of States — Perquisites Important to 
Farmers — Value of Perquisites to Individuals — Living Needs and Standards 
of Families Vary — The Unearned Increment. 

CHAPTER XIII 

Factors Affecting Profits 275 

Factors Affecting Profits — The Type of Farming as Affecting Profits — 
Examples of Effect on Profits of Type of Business — Size of Business as 
Affecting Profits — Effect of Size of Farm Area upon Income — Summary of 
Survey Findings, Effect of Size of Farm upon Income — Effect of Amount of 
Working Capital upon Income — Effect upon Income of Efficient Use of 
Land, Equipment and Labor — Examples of Effect upon Income of Efficient 
Use of Land, Equipment and Labor — Ways of Increasing the Size of the 
Farm Business — Quality of Business as Affecting Profits — Limitations to Im- 
proving Quality of the Business — Influence of Crop Yields upon Farm 
Profits — Where Greater Profit-taking is Easier — Examples of the Effect of 
Crop Yields upon Income — Influence of Live-stock Receipts upon Farm 
. Profits — Examples — Effect of All Four Factors upon Incomes — Influence 
of High Prices on Profits — Increasing Profits by Curtailing Waste — Ways of 
Curtailing Waste — Examples Are Easy to Find — Curtailing Losses Caused 
by Rodents and Predatory Animals — Caused by Weeds, Insects, and Fungi — 
Caused by Animal Disease — Saving Energy of Workers — Eliminating Unpro- 
fitable Operations — Curtailing Lost Motion — Establishing Methods to 
Detect Waste — Reducing Various Waste — Curtailing Wastes in Feed 
Stock — In Boarding Men — Eliminating Unprofitable Investments and 
Surplus Labor. 

CHAPTER XIV 

Financial Forecast of Proposed Farm Lands 300 

Objects of Financial Forecast — Limitation — Justification — Actual Practice 
Likely to Vary from Paper Plans — Procedure in Making up a Financial 
Forecast — Description of the Property — The Plan of Work — The Necessary 
Equipment. — The Financial Test — Example of Financial Forecast. 

CHAPTER XV 

Farm Management Surveys 314 

Purposes of Farm Management Surveys — Method of Making Use of the 
Survey Methods for Collecting Farm Management Data — Personal Opinion 



xvi ' CONTENTS 

Page 
Concerning Farm Management Surveys — Single Year vs. Continuous 
Records — Surveys Are Based on Farmer's Estimates — Possible Objection to 
Reporting Survey Data — Sample Forms Used in Farm Management Survey 
Work — List of Farm Management Surveys — Federal Farm Surveys — State 
Surveys — Farm Practice Surveys — Studies of Sugar Beet Farms — Studies 
of Apple Orchards — Studies of Potato Farms — Studies of Poultry Farms — 
Studies of Dairy Farms — Studies of Cotton Cultivation. 

PART II 

Introduction to Part II 335 

CHAPTER XVI 

Farm Bookkeeping 337 

Definition of Farm Bookkeeping — Do Farmers Keep Records? — Purpose of 
Farm Accounts — Record-keeping Results in Closer Attention to Details — 
Account-keeping Can Be Made Attractive — Preliminaries in Starting Farm 
Bookkeeping — Scope of Complete Farm Accounts — Simple Accounts — 
Cost Records — Value — What Records to Keep — Records Used in the Simple 
System — Comparison of Bookkeeping and Cost Accounting — Supplementary 
Records — The Annual Summary as a Means of Determining What Records 
to Keep — Time Element in Keeping Accounts — Technical Training Unnec- 
essary — Simplifying Accounts — Interpretation and Use of Results — Discus- 
sion of Records — Definition of Inventory — Value — Use — Taking an Inven- 
tory — Form for Inventory Taking — Determining Inventory Values — 
Valuing Implements, Machinery and Tools — Valuing Farm Animals — Valu- 
ing Field Crops — Effects of Appreciation and Depreciation upon Values 
— Depreciation Studies — Appreciation and Depreciation of Work Horses — 
Depreciation of Farm Equipment — The Cash Book — Description of the 
Cash Book — Example of Simple Cash Book — Cash Book Items Recorded 
by Enterprises — The Use of a Bank Book as a Cash Record — The Farm 
Diary Method of Records — Example of Diary Items — Description of the 
Annual Statement — Steps in Making Up an Annual Statement. 

CHAPTER XVII 

Farm Cost Accounting 372 

Function of Farm Cost Accounting — Farm Cost Accounting Similar to 
Commercial Cost Accounting — Cost Accounting Introduces Estimates — 
A Favorable Time to Start Accounts — Classes of Records Needed for a 
Complete Set of Farm Cost Accounts — Items to be Covered in Crop Cost 
Accounting — Charges — Credits to Crop — Items to be Covered in Live- 
stock Cost Accounting — Charges — Credits — Inventories in Cost Accounting 
— The Cash Book in Cost Accounting — Properly Classifying Items — How 
the Cash Book Entries Are Made — Indexing Accounts — Feed Records in 
Cost Accounting — Crediting Production — Manure Accounts — Labor 
Records for Cost Accounts — How the Work Record Entries Are Made — 
Method of Recording Routine Work or "Chores" — Supplementary Records 
— Supplementary Notes — Opening Cost Records at the Beginning of the 
Year — Closing Cost Accounts at the End of the Year — Increased Land 
Values — Determining Overhead — Illustrating Method of Determining 
Overhead — Final Test of Value of Cost Accounts — Example of Annual 
Statement Compiled from Costs Records — Example of a Crop Enterprise 
Costs Record — Study and Interpretation of Results. 



cox TEXTS xvii 

CH,\PTER XVIII 

Page 

Costs of Producixg Crops 404 

Value of Costs of Production Data — Studying Costs of Production — Items 
Entering into Cost of Production — Objects Sought in Cost of Production 
Studies — The Farm Managers Interest — Cost of Production Studies 
Should Start on Single Industn- Farm — Average Cost Data Are an Unsafe 
Guide for all Conditions — Methods of Procedure in Making Cost of Pro- 
duction Studies — Examples of Costs of Producing Field Crops — Reporting 
Items in Terms of Time or Quantit5' — Costs of Producing Field Crop)s — 
Nebraska Costs: Com. TMieat, Oats. Hay: 1909-10 — Minnesota Costs: 
Barley. Clover. Com. Ensilage, Flaxseed, Hay, Hemp. Mangels, Potatoes: 
1902-1907 — South Carolina Costs: Cotton, Com, Oats, Hay, Cowpea Seed, 
Wheat 191-1^15 — Texas Costs: Cotton, Com, Oats, Hay, Sorghums: 1914 — 
Kentucky Costs: Tobacco, Stock, Dain,-, Mixed: 1913 — Georgia Costs, 
Com, Oats, Sugar Cane, Potatoes, Watermelons; 1914 — Missouri Costs: 
Com, Oats. WTieat, Rye, Clover, Timothy and Alfalfa Hay, Soy Beans, and 
Cowpea Hay — Costs of Producing Sugar Beets — Costs of Producing Cotton 
— Costs of Producing Wheat — Costs of Producing California Field Crops: 
1915 and 1919 — Costs of Producing Fruit Crops — Costs of Producing 
Apples: Washington, Colorado, Oregon, Idaho, 1914-15 — Indiana Apple 
Costs: 1911-12 — West Virginia Peach Costs: 1912 — Nebraska Spraying 
Costs: 1913, 14, 15 — Costs of California Emits: 1915 and 1919 — CaUfomia 
Citrus Costs: 1913, 14, 15, 16 — Costs of Producing Vegetables and Truck 
Crops — Cahfomia Vegetable Costs — Utah Tomato Costs. 

CHAPTER XIX 

Costs of Producixg LrvF Stock axd Stock Prodccts : Miscellaxeous Costs . 435 
Cost of Fattening Beef — Summary- — Cost of Producing Hogs — Costs of Rais- 
ing Dairy Heifers — Costs of Raising Pullets — Costs of Fattening Lambs — 
California Cost Data : Beef, Sheep and Swine — Financial Items of California 
Beef Business (Average Figures) — Cost Data of California Dain.-ing Business 
(Average Figures) — Costs of Producing MUk — Reference to Outline for 
Conducting Cost of MUk Production Studies — Miscellaneous Costs — Costs 
of Clearing Land, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin, Reported 1914 — Cost 
of Tile Drainage, Ohio, 1910-11 — Labor Requirements in Connection with 
Live Stock — Labor Requirements of Dairy Cows — ^Labor Requirements of 
Work Horses — Machinerj' Costs — L'. S. Hauling Costs: 1905-6. 

CHAPTER XX 

Marketixg Methods 469 

Imports and Exports as Guides to Conditions — The Effect upon Exports 
of World War Conditions — Effects of Exports upon Prices — Distribution 
Terms — Market Trend — How Farm Products Are Marketed — Study the 
ImpKjrtant Products First — Marketing Methods Varj- — Ma'-keting Agencies 
— Ways of Marketing — Choosing the Marketing Method — Inventory 
Method of Testing Marketing Agencies — Similar Tests of Other Agencies — 
I*resent System of Marketing Is Sound — Visiting the Markets — Value 
of Visiting the Markets — Few Growers Visit Their Markets — Influence of 
Weather upon Sales — Packages and Containers Van*- — Studj-ing Tj-pes of 
Containers — Examples of Market Containers and Packages — The Best 
Container — Shipping Carload Lots. 



xviii CONTENTS 

CHAPTER XXI 

Page 

Market Quotations . 497 

Reasons Why Market Quotations Are Fallible — Quotations of Different 
Markets Should Be Studied — Quotations Indicate Market Demands — 
Sources of Market Quotations — Examples — How Obtained — Symbols of 
Terms Used — Past Quotations a Guide to Sellng — Five-year Periods to Be 
Used in Studying Past Quotations — Examples of Past Quotations as a Guide 
to Selling — Regular and Irregular Fluctuations — The Natural Market 
Course — Periods of High and Low Prices for Various Farm Products on Dif- 
ferent Markets — Holding Products for High Prices — Money Difference in 
Periods of High and Low Prices — Use of Past Quotations as a Normal in 
Reporting Prices — Prorating the Consumer's Dollar — Prorating Money 
Spent for Oranges — Prorating Money Spent for Apples — Proration of 
Money Spent for Onions — Comparison of Retail Prices and Farmers' 
Receipts — Reasons for Price Spread Between Producer and Consumer — 
Conclusion — Partial List of References to Literature upon Marketing. 

CHAPTER XXII 

Farm Labor 517 

The Farm Management Aspect of Farm Labor — Interest in Labor Depends 
on Viewpoint — Five Points of View Concerning Farm Labor — Conflicting 
Ideas Result from Different Viewpoints — The Farm Manager's Respon- 
sibility and Viewpoint — Classes of Farm Labor — White — Hobo or Tramp — 
Italian and Portuguese — Negro — Mexican — Indian — Japanese — Hindu — 
Chinese — Kind of Help Needed by Farmers — Classification of Farmers' 
Labor Needs — Transient and Seasonal Labor Needs — The Worker's View- 
point — Student Experiences Indicate the Worker's Viewpoint — Student 
Experiences as Farm Laborers — Student Adverse Comments — What Con- 
stitutes Good Working Conditions — Working Hours — Boarding the Men — 
Example of Kitchen Supplies Cost of Boarding Men — Keeping Track of 
Kitchen Costs and Practices — Examples of Cost of Boarding Help — Housing 
Farm Help — Improving Quarters Helps Individual Employer — Supervision ■ 
of Farm Help — Wages Paid to Farm Help in United States — Sectional 
Variations in Wage Scales — Value of Board as a Part of Wages — What 
Constitutes a Satisfactory Wage Scale — Paying the Men — Use of Bonuses 
or Premiums — Handling Labor — Farmers' Part in Getting Good Farm 
Labor — Selection of Good Foremen Essential — Personal Qualities Necessary 
to the Successful Handling of Men — Personal Relation of Employer to Men 
— Discouraging Tattling — A Normal Day's Work — Conditions Affecting a 
Day's Work — Providing Equipment for Farm Help — Efficient Use of 
Equipment — Locating Labor Supplies. 

CHAPTER XXIII 

Farm Tenancy 559 

Definitions Used in Farm Tenancy — Utilization of Tenancy — Testing 
Proposed Tenancy Plans — Tenancy as a Means of Getting Started in 
Farming — Tenancy Provides a Test of the Attractiveness of Farming — 
Tenancy Provides a Preliminary Test Prior to Purchasing Farm Lands — 
The Principal Kinds of Tenure — Cash Rent — Standing Rent — Share Rent — 
Share-cash — Cropping Rent — Preferences for Either Share or Cash Rent — 
Reasons Given for Preferring Share Tenancj^ — Reasons Given for Preferring 



CONTENTS xix 

Page 

Cash Tenancy — Length of Tenure — Short Tenure Lease Favored — Period of 
Tenure — Influence of Annual Leases on Changing of Tenants — Conditions 
WTien Long Term Leases Are Favored — Example of Long Term Leases — 
• Advantages — Advantages of the Short Term Lease — Length of Lease 
Depends upon Circumstances — Leasing Practices in the United States — 
Methods of Sharing Crops and Stock Products — Field Crops — Orchard 
Fruits — Live Stock and Stock Products — Methods of Sharmg Pasture — 
Dairy Farms — Dairy Leasing Practices — Wisconsin and Illinois — Stock 
Farms Practices — General Farms Leasing Practices — Leasing Practices in 
the Cotton Belt — Fundamental Factors in Leasing Farm Lands. 

CHAPTER XXIV 

Farm Lease Forms 575 

Examples of Common Cash and Share Leases — Example of Partnership 
Lease — Example of Stock-share Lease — WTiat the Lease Should Contain — 
Form of the Lease — Legal Requirements — Points to Be Considered in the 
Farm Lease — General Details — Reser\^ations — Assurances and Guaranties 
by the Tenant — By the Landlord — Agreements with Respect to Credit 
Furnished by the Landlord — Respective Contributions by Each Party to 
Operating Capital — Adjustments with Respect to Property Owned in Joint 
Account — Respective Contributions by Each Party to Expenses — Payment 
of Rent — Privileges for which Special Rent Is or Is Not to Be Paid — Specifi- 
cations with Respect to the Care, Use, and Improvement of Real Estate and 
Arrangement for Labor and Materials as Needed for These Purposes — Speci- 
fications with Respect to Farm Methods and Procedure — Provision for 
Supervision — Procedure at Termination of Lease — Enforcement of Con- 
tract — Adjustment of Differences — Provisions to Insure Enforcement — 
Final Details — Proposed Standard Contract Forms for Leases — Suggested 
Division of Responsibility in Investment and Interest in Income — The 
Partnership Lease — Example of How a Partnership Lease Works — The 
Empirical Method — Rights of Each Party to a Lease Under the Empirical 
Method — Advocates of the Empirical Method — Objection to the Empirical 
Method — Points to be Observed in Taking a Diversified Enterprise — Esti- 
mating Rental Rates for Farm Fully Equipped. 

CHAPTER XXV 

Farm Law 601 

^^^lat Law Is — Written Law — Unwritten Law — Farm Law — Classification 
of Farm Law — Field so Extensive, Necessary to Limit Discussion — Our 
Attention Confined to Regulative Legislation — Conceptions of the Law — 
Legal Definition of a Farmer — Legal Definition of a Farm — Boundaries — 
Waters of the Farm — Riparian — Underground Waters — Kinds of Title to 
Farm Lands — Title by Grant — Rights of Way (Appurtenance) — Farm 
Workers and Laborers — Legal Status of Crops — Laws Relating to Live Stock 
— Sales — Factors or Commission Merchants — State Legislation — County 
and Municipal Regulations — Conclusion to Farm Law. 



PART III 

Introduction to Part III 625 



XX CONTENTS 

CHAPTER XXVI 

Page 

The Farm Manager 627 

Selling Service: Duties: Qualification: Outlook — Definition and Status of 
the Farm Manager — Selling Service^ — What Does an Employer Desire in an 
Employee? — What Has a College Trained Man to Offer? — A College Educa- 
tion — Looking for a Position — Choosing the Employer — Application — 
Examples of Letters of Application — Personal Interview — References and 
Testimonials — Selling Ability Paramount in Business Estate Administration 
— Reviewing Going Concerns — Salaries — Profit Sharing for Managers — 
Utilization of Salary — In Conclusion. 

CHAPTER XXVII 

Index to References 647 

Index 667 



FARM MANAGEMENT 

CHAPTER I 
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS OF FARM MANAGEMENT 

Farming is business. It is as much business as importing goods, 
selling merchandise, building ships, running a railroad, and handling a 
mine. Jointly with industry in general, farming is subject to business 
principles and reacts to economic influences. The present day farmer 
should recognize that as such he is also essentially a business man, or else 
he must eventually succumb in competition with other business men. 

Keeping step with the increasingly rapid but hit-or-miss application 
of business principles to farming by farmers themselves, men of inquiring 
mind have developed the science and art of Farm Management. In the 
former capacity it analyzes and classifies findings and principles; in the 
latter it endeavors to apply these systematically so as to insure more 
and more profitable agriculture. It follows that farm management is 
primarilj^ concerned with the business side of farming — with the business 
principles involved. 

Definition of Farm Management. — Management in farming falls 
naturally into two subdivisions — (a) as a subject, (6) as a method. 
Farm management — the subject — is the presentation of business and 
scientific findings in their application to farming, for the purpose of 
indicating the way to greatest continuous profit. 

Farm management — the method — is the utilization of sound princi- 
ples in the selection, organization, and conduct of an individual farm 
business for the purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profit. 

The terms "farm organization" and "farm administration" are 
closely synonymous with farm management. 

The Object of Farm Management. — The object of farm management 
has been stated in the definition, to obtain from the various enterprises 
of an individual farm business the greatest returns consistent with a 
broad, clear, and far-sighted policy. This object constitutes a test to 
be applied first, to the choice of farming as a business; second, to the 
selection of a specific farm business; third, to the selection of a farm and 
its proper equipping; fourth, to the detailed operation of a farm when 
established as a going enterprise. 

Scope of Farm Management. — Put in a condensed form and with 
some seeming repetition from the statement above, the concern of farm 
management is with 

1 



2 FARM MANAGEMENT 

{A) Getting started in farming: 

1. Selecting fanning as a business. 

2. Selecting a specific farm business. 

3. Selecting the farm. 

4. Determining capital needs and obtaining credits. 

5. Organizing the farm business. 

6. Equipping the farm. 
{B) Operating farm enterprises: 

1. Directing crop and stock enterprises so as to obtain the 
greatest possible ci:>ntinuous net profits. 

2. Handling farm labor. 

3. Keeping account of operations and results. 

4. Selling products. 

Consideration of this tah»le suggests the following generalization of 
the two-fold scope of farm management (compare the definition of farm 
management abovej : 

(a) The recording, presenting, and discussing of all available farm 
management data as applicable to prevailing local conditions. These 
data will be (\) those generallj- pf^sf^iSfid or recognized by competent 
students and practitioners of farm management; and (2) those that may- 
be strictly local — perhaps not yet classified or published — while yet 
knowledge of them may l>e of supreme importances for the successful 
prosecution of a given crop or live stock enterprise, ih) The actual hand- 
ling of a farm or ranch enterprise, i.e., the carrying out of the duties and 
the assumption of the rcisponsibilities of a farm manager. 

A clean-cut distinction can thus be made between the practice of 
farm management and the presentation of information needed by the 
farm manager. All h»ooks on farm management are obliged to convey 
certain secondary facts ryjntributory to the practice of farm management. 
For instance, a discussion of farm labor covers not only concrete ways of 
handling labor as a part of farm management, but also at least a brief look 
into prevailing hours, wages, and activities. A better understanding of 
planning or replaiming a given farmstead will follow a review of prevailing 
building typ^s for the same kind of businf^ss under the same kind of envi- 
ronment. It is \xtT\iii])H not newssar>' to HapamUi information and appli- 
cation at this stage of our knowledge of farm management, but as time 
gOf:rs on and the accumulation of data proweds, a w^gregation of the two 
lAiUHfih will prove desirable. 

At this point, however, let us note with increasejd emphasis that 
farm management at bottom is interestejd in the individual fann as a unit. 
It attempts to apply widely gathered scientific findings as well as local 
knowledge to one particular farm or ranch at a time. It obtains ih(^i 
findings from many sources — agronomy, horticulture, animal husbandry, 
local farm practices, rural sociology, business exr^mcnces— which are 



GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 3 

brought together, culled over, interpreted in terms of business, and, if 
utilizable, incorporated as part and parcel of the individual farm business. 

Farm Management vs. Agricultural Economics.— The above con- 
ception of farm management distinguishes it rather sharply from the 
field occupied by agricultural (rural) economics, since agricultural econo- 
mics deals with groups of farms, and from the resulting analysis, deter- 
mines principles applicable not alone to the farm business, but to the 
national welfare and even to international contact. Farm management, 
as outlined here, is not as widespread in its scope, nor as far reaching, as 
agricultural economics. Within its sphere, farm management is con- 
cerned with the individual agriculturist, rather than with the general 
welfare of agriculture. 

Illustration Contrasting Farm Management and Farm Economics. — 
Tenancy gives an excellent illustration of the viewpoints held by farm 
management men in contrast with those of the economists. From the 
individual's viewpoint tenancy may be a very desirable, and perhaps 
the only, way to obtain a start. Farm managers point out that the 
logical route for the beginner in agriculture who is to use his hands as 
well as his brain is through the successive stages of farm hand, tenant, 
owner. Tenancy provides opportunities for individuals who may not 
be in a position to buy. From the farm economics standpoint, the pres- 
ent feeling is one of grave concern over the increasing proportion of 
tenant-farmed lands in these United States. 

Better marketing conditions through the cooperation of producers 
will undoubtedly result in advantage to the large body of farmers. But 
from the farm management viewpoint, a decision is to be made as to 
whether or not under given conditions, it is better to combine fellow 
farmers and pool interests, or to sell independently. 

Farmers' Individual Interests do not Neglect Community Interests. — 
What is here said may sound as if the farm manager's viewpoint is purely 
individualistic and selfish. It is in his relation with his own enterprise. 
But this is far from saying that the farmer cannot or does not practice 
as generous an altruism and exemplify as humane a citizenship as any 
other man. Is it not correct that the truest democracy and the finest 
civilization are unvariably found to rest upon basic industries, the most 
important being agriculture, carried on bj^ indi\adual proprietors, who, 
when they cooperate, do so under no other compulsion than an inward 
willingness? 

Financial Success Usual Farm Management Measure. — The farmer 
who applies business principles to his farming operations does so with the 
object of obtaining the greatest returns from expenditures of muscle, 
brains and capital, in competition with other farmers and other industries. 
This means that methods and recommendations are brought before the 
bar of finance. Financial success is the usual measure of farm manage- 
ment inquiry. Recognition of this fact is indicated by methods of report- 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



ing the outcome of agricultural experiments. Two or three illustrations 
will suffice. 

In Comparing Experiments with Crops. — In comparing the result of a 
season's work with 11 differently handled field plots, Thorn and Holtz^ 
present the net returns per acre over cost of production. The summary 
shows: 

Table 1. — Financial Comparison op Crop Experiments 



No. 

of 

plot 


How treated 


Yield in 

bushels per 

acre 


Gross 
returns 
per acre 


Cost 
per acre 


Net 
returns 
per acre 


1 


Corn and wheat alternating, fall 
plowed each year 


Com 30.0 
Wheat 37 . 8 


$56.24 


$13.65 


$42.59 


2 


Peas and wheat alternating, fall 
plowed each year 


Peas 32 . 
Wheat 33 . 7 


52.56 


17.35 


35.21 


3 


Wheat and summer fallow, fall 
plowed after wheat 


Wheat 49.4 


39.50 


10.05 


29.45 


4 


Wheat and summer fallow, spring 
plowing, April 3, packed 


WTieat 49.0 


39.20 


10.55 


28.65 


5 


Wheat and summer fallow, early 
spring plowing, April 3, not 
packed 


Wheat 51.7 


41.36 


10.35 


31.01 


6 


Wheat and volunteer, volunteer 
used for pasture, fall plowed 
after volunteer 


Wheat 20.2 


17.16 


6.15 


11.01 


7 


Wheat and summer fallow, late 
spring plowing, June 10, not 
packed 


Wheat 38.5 


31.00 


8.80 


22.20 


8 


Wheat and summer fallow, late 
spring plowing, June 10, not 
packed 


Wheat 36.6 


29.28 


8.05 


21.23 


9 


Wheat and summer fallow, early 
spring disked, April 3, late 
spring plowing, June 10, packed 


Wheat 42.4 


33.92 


9.70 


24.22 


10 


Wheat and summer fallow, fall 
disked, late spring plowing, 
June 10, packed 


Wheat 37.3 


29.84 


9.20 


20.64 


11 


Wheat and summer fallow, fall 
plowing, late spring disking, 
June 10 


Wheat 49.7 


39.76 


9.45 


30.31 



^ See chapter of references. 



GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 5 

In Comparing Stock-Feeding Experiments. — The use of a financial 
statement in presenting results of stock-feeding experiments is of long 
standing. The following is illustrative :^ 



Table 2. — Financial Comparison of 


Stock-feeding Experiments 


Lot number 


1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


Number of steers 


12 
780 


12 
774 


12 
760 


12 

742 


12 


Average weight at beginning of 
experiment, pounds 


757 


Cost per steer at beginning of ex- 
periment at $6.05 per 100 lb 

Cost of feed consumed per steer 
during experiment 

Freight charge per steer in market- 
ing at 171/^ ?i per 100 lb 


$47.19 

20.45 

1.70 
0.25 
0.11 
0.50 


$46.83 

24.98 

1.78 
0.25 
0.11 
0.50 


$45.98 

25.82 

1.78 
0.25 
0.11 
0.50 


$44.89 

31.48 

1.79 
0.25 
0.11 
0.50 


$45.79 

20.45 

1.70 


Cost of yardage per steer on market. 
Cost of hay per steer on market. . . . 
Commission per steer in selling 


0.25 
0.11 
0.50 


Total cost per steer 

Selling price per steer 


$70.20 
71.44 


$74.45 
76.35 


$74.44 
77.88 


$79.02 
79.36 


$68.80 
69.98 


Net profit per steer 


1.24 


1.90 


3.44 


.34 


1.18 


Prices per 100 lb. for which steers 
actually sold 


$ 7.35 
7.22 

1.17 

8.25 
2.20 


$ 7.50 
7.31 

1.26 

8.29 

2.24 


$ 7.65 
7.31 

1.26 

8.29 

2.24 


$ 7.75 
7.71 

1.66 

8.69 

2.64 


$ 7.20 


Prices per 100 lb. necessary to have 
broken even (hogs not included) .... 

Increases in selling prices per 100 lb. 
above initial cost necessary to have 
broken even 


7.08 
1.03 


Prices per 100 lb. necessary to have 
made a profit of $10 per head (hogs 
not included) 


8.10 


Increases in selling prices per 100 lb. 
above initial cost necessary to have 
made a profit of $10 per head 


2.05 



In Comparing the Value of Spraying Experiments. — In computing the 
value of spraying experiments, records covering the years 1913, 1914, and 
1915 were reported thus:^ 



6 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 3. — Financial Comparison of Spraying Experiments 

Plat 1— Total value of fruit $12.05 

Value of fruit on check plat 2 . 28 

Difference 9 . 77 

Cost of spraying . 29 

Net gain from spraying 9 . 48 

Plat 2— Total value of fruit 7.47 

Value of fruit on check . 10 

Difference .7.37 

Cost of spraying . 25 

Net gain from spraying ■ . 7 . 12 

Plat 3— Total value of fruit 14. 63 

Value of fruit on check . 40 

Difference 14.23 

Cost of spraying . 26 

Net gain from spraying 13 . 97 

Plat 4— Total value of fruit 10 . 59 

Value of fruit on check 0.21 

Difference 10 . 38 

Cost of spraying . 24 

Net gain from spraying 10 . 14 

Plat 5— Total value of fruit 26 . 31 

Value of fruit on check 5 . 66 

Difference 20 . 65 

Cost of spraying . 25 

Net gain from spraying 20 . 40 

Plat 6— Total value of fruit 17 . 55 

Value of fruit on check 2.14 

Difference 15 . 41 

Cost of spraying . 26 

Net gain from spraying 14 . 15 

Use of Financial Test is General. — Use of the financial test can be 
found everywhere. It is involved in determining such questions as: 

1. Does prolonged life of fence posts by dipping in asphaltum pay for 
the extra cost of material and labor? 

2. Will a small pumping plant run 24 hours in connection with a 
reservoir, be ultimately cheaper than a large plant run for 12 hours — the 
period of actually applying water? 

3. In warm, sunny climates, is the painting of farm buildings 
justifiable? 

4. Is it cheaper to sell grain at harvest and rebuy in spring, or to store 
and meet the various direct and indirect charges {e.g., storage charges 
and interest on money invested) ? 

5. Under poor drainage conditions, will tilling a limited area pay? 

6. Under given conditions, will the buying and fattening of stock 
cattle pay? 

7. Is a breeder justified in paying high prices for sires, as $12,000 for 
a boar, $109,000 for a dairy bull, $25,000 for a beef bull? 



GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 7 

Basic Knowledge of Agricultural Sciences and Practices Precedes 
Farm Management. — We have already perhaps made clear the complex 
character of our subject, even if we have done nothing else. But there is 
more to come to make this preliminary analysis complete : we must remind 
the reader that in delving into farm management he must equip him- 
self with a panoply of fundamental knowledge. Empiricism grows 
less and less dependable. The manager must himself actually possess 
the existing body of knowledge about the feeding, breeding, and 
handling of stock; the requirements of soil preparation, seeding, culti- 
vation, and harvest of crops; how to recognize soil types; alkali; irrigation; 
drainage; animal and plant diseases; handling of soils — plowing, culti- 
vating, fertilizing, liming; control of weed, fungus, and insect pests; the 
elements of chemistry, botany, and genetics; the business principles 
involved in bookkeeping, banking, and selling. Only upon such a founda- 
tion can successful farm management be built. Just as in building a 
house one must know the relationship of the different parts, the strength 
necessary for each, the best choice of material, and the best type of 
construction for a given purpose, so in building up the farm, one must 
know the limits of each possible industry and how to proportion them 
to bring about a properly balanced and constructed scheme. Farm man- 
agement is, then, the ability to test the adaptableness of the different 
agricultural elements within reach, and to carry out to success the scheme 
resulting from the selection and combination of these elements. 

Examples Illustrating Function of Farm Management. — Let us now 
make these distinctions and relationships still plainer. Plant industry 
is responsible for information as to how to grow a crop. Animal industry 
is charged with the duty of pointing out how to handle stock and how to 
produce stock products. Similarly, farm mechanics is concerned with 
indicating how to select, purchase, and operate farm machinery; and 
plant pathology and entomology with how to control diseases and insects. 
Now it is the function of farm management, on the other hand, to decide 
when to use the contributions of these sciences and how much of them 
to use for meeting given conditions, with reasons for the decisions. 

To Illustrate. — Will this land grow barley better than alfalfa, or will there be 
rain enough in this district to grow alfalfa? This is a plant industry question. Even 
if this land does grow barley better than alfalfa, does it grow it enough better to 
promise greater net profit after taking into account market value of crop, possibiHty 
of its disposition, and final yield of the acreage? This is a farm management problem. 

From the standpoint of physical welfare the problem, shall sows be bred once or 
twice a year is for animal husbandry to determine. But, are conditions such that more 
profit will result from one or from two litters per year is a question for farm manage- 
ment to decide. 

If one is to buy 20 acres of land to set out to peaches, he must needs consider the 
demands of the peach as to soil, climate, water, planting, cultivation, pest control, 
pruning, fertilizing, harvesting, and marketing. This is basic information. Farm 



8 FARM MANAGEMENT 

management is concerned with the amount of capital required to buy the land and 
carry on the project, the amount of labor needed at different times of the year, a 
possible source of income until the trees are in bearing, the equipment required for 
working the land, the necessary buildings, the question of soil fertility and possibility 
of intercropping, the location and demands of a market for the product when grown, 
and the limiting distance of profitable haul. 

Typical Farm Management Questions. — Other questions of a dis- 
tinctly farm management nature are: 

What can a man expect to make on 40 acres of alfalfa land yielding 6 tons per 
acre, given over to hogs, if he understands the business, discounts cholera, and practices 
intensive methods? 

I am interested in fruits, and have $12,000 to invest. Will you kindly answer the 
following? 

(a) If I buy a bearing orchard, which offers the greatest profit — prunes, pears or 
peaches? 

(6) How much can I afford to pay for typical producing land? 

(c) How big an acreage can I buy, considering it in bearing, and leave enough to 
purchase the necessary work stock, meet running expenses, and keep my family for 
one year? (The latter item should amount to about $900.) 

Which offers the best returns as an investment — a stock ranch of 2,000 acres that 
will carry 200 head of beef cattle, or 200 acres that will raise good crops of beans, 
potatoes, and alfalfa? In the latter case I should put one-third of the acreage into 
each annually, selling all the product. 

How many fat beeves can I turn off annually on a 1,000-acre ranch carrying one head 
to 20 acres, and what, on an average, will such land be worth? 

Students of farm management find an extensive field to draw upon, 
and soon learn that there is naturally a good deal of overlapping. Many 
subjects must be considered, and there can be no sharp line of demarca- 
tion between what is strictly farm management and what strictly plant 
culture or animal husbandry. 

Graphic Presentation of the Place of Farm Management. — The 
accompanying chart illustrates graphically the foregoing observations. 
Students will find it a helpful guide. The chart makes clear that at best 
the entire field is made up of interlocking subjects. In college curricula 
these are usually treated as more or less distinct, each in its own sphere. 
As already pointed out, in actual practice no such clear-cut differentiation 
is possible. Agronomic subjects dovetail into animal husbandry. Sheep, 
swine, cattle, and poultry are closely correlated with alfalfa, barley, 
wheat, corn, hay, and pasture crops. Horticultural practices draw 
upon plant pathology and entomology to a remarkable extent. 

Chart Arrangement Arbitrary but Valuable. — Since each individual 
brings to bear a perspective based on the field he is attempting to cover, 
other investigators and teachers may find fault with this arbitrary 
arrangement. It is clear, however, that a brief explanation of this chart, 
carrying with it, as it does, the subject matter properly pertaining to 
farm management, goes far to provide the student with a mental picture 



GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 



9 



as a starting point in his attempt to classify the many subjects that 
support and dovetail into the field of farm management. Only a little 
study of the chart is needed to show the necessity of thorough training 
in the many subjects which form the foundation of farm management 
before actual study begins. Farm management, resting as it does on 
corner stones of training and experience, is, in college, a course for ad- 
vanced students, not for elementary classes. 




Agricultural Aqncultura) tSoTany 
Sactenology Cnemistry 

Chart 1. — Graphic presentation of the place of farm management 



ogy Genetics Oeology Irrigation Plant Soils Zoology 

Pattiology 



The sizes of the squares in this chart do not necessarily indicate the 
relative importance of the subjects, other than to indicate their immediate 
and primary importance when gauged from the farm manager's point 
of view. 

Use of Farm Management a Personal Matter. — The extent that 
farm management as exhibited in this work or in similar texts shall be 
applied to a given business is a personal matter. Knowledge of what 
farm management consists of and how business principles can be applied 
to farming operations should undoubtedly constitute a part of every 
farmer's equipment. Ignoring such principles, wholly or in part, is 
purely a personal privilege. Some men prefer to live in a pleasant home 
community and take less than the usual rate of interest on the investment; 
others prefer a business with relatively small possibilities in the way of 
returns if they can farm at something they like ; others are willing to put 
up with the hardships of pioneering because they like frontier life or the 
subduing of difficult conditions; while still other men prefer to let 
someone else do the reclamation or pioneer work and to pay them for so 
doing. 



10 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Any farmer, either active or prospective, however, should know what 
he is doing, and if he is failing to get the most out of his business, he should 
know the reason why, and be ready to defend his methods — at least to 
himself. 

The owners of many farms are disillusioned when farm management 
principles are applied. The presence of a minus income, the neces- 
sity of allowing for labor of all members of the family, the realization 
of the heavy investment, the knowledge that the operator is failing 
to get from the business all that he is rightly entitled to, are discon- 
certing and sometimes discouraging discoveries. In such cases if 
ignorance is bliss then it is folly to apply farm management tests. Never- 
theless, every year greater numbers find the pleasure that lies in the 
subject, in the application of business principles to all farming operations. 
Its use is varied, extensive, and clean-cut. To test every proposed plan by 
balancing the saving or income against the cost becomes contagious. 
And in the doing, a better understanding is gained of agriculture. 

Farm management does not enjoin a man from erecting any kind 
of buildings that meets his needs and desires, provided he understands 
what he is doing and is willing to accept the consequences of too great 
or too little investment, of freakish construction, or of temporary struc- 
tures where permanent should prevail. It is personal privilege to 
farm one's land to grain and beans although fruit or live stock may be 
equally possible and actually more profitable. It is one's right to use 
horses even if tractors are cheaper, or the reverse; to sell independently 
when cooperation is possible; to rent rather than to own; to hire peon* 
labor; to store implements in the open; and to transgress many other 
business principles. But farm management, while recognizing personal 
privilege, is concerned that due attention be given to what from a 
business standpoint is justifiable and proper. What is finally done is the 
individual's concern; what should be done is the ground work of enlight- 
enment and instruction (to the extent of available knowledge) upon 
which the whole subject of farm management rests. 

Farm Management Constantly Changing. — Since farm management 
is concerned with the business side of farming a presentation of farm 
management must be general in scope and character. No business 
remains entirely stable or constant. All businesses fluctuate as changes 
occur in their zones of contact with other industries and influences. So 
farming needs change with labor shortage, good or poor markets, low 
prices, tight money, the demands for land, the influence of Japanese, 
Hindus, or other foreign races upon both the production of farm products 
and the social life of American communities. Sometimes one thing is of 

*Peon as used in this book is a western word, meaning low-grade labor, especially 
Mexican. It carries none of the implications of the word peonage as applied to certain 
alleged practices in some of our southern states. 



GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 11 

outstanding importance; at other times an entirely different factor will 
be preeminent. 

Use of Farm Management in Actual Farming. — Great variation is to 
be found throughout the United States in the extent that farm manage- 
ment is used in actual farming operations. The least use of farm manage- 
ment is found on the tiny farms recently cleared of brush or reclaimed 
from swamp, devoted to but one or two crops, using one animal as 
motive power, and equipped only with the minor farm implements. The 
equipment consists of an unpainted shack of one or two rooms, a small 
shed to house the horse or mule, a well, cistern, or spring, and a bit of 
cleared land roughly fenced. 

The farm management of the typical negro farmer of the South, of the 
Indian of the West, of the Mexican of the Southwest, or of the little 
farmer of the dry areas or high altitudes, is simply the farm practice 
which he has acquired from long experience, and has traditionally followed. 

The other extreme in the application of farm management is to be 
found in the large corporation holdings, farmed in units but coordinated 
into a gigantic enterprise, covering, in certain instances, hundreds of 
thousands of acres, and requiring the shrewdest application of farm man- 
agement in its many business and technical aspects. An enterprise of 
this sort covers many combinations of agricultural enterprises — cattle, 
sheep, horses, hogs, dairying, alfalfa, corn, sorghum, barley, wheat, oats, 
rice, cotton, sugar beets, beans, deciduous and citrus fruits. In the more 
outstanding of these enterprises are to be found the best examples of 
farm management today. Their managers, often keen businessmen, 
developed by city training, have attempted to choose the most profitable 
combination of enterprises for the particular soil, climate, water, labor, 
and market conditions they have to face, to place able men in charge, to 
follow approved agronomic, horticultural, and live stock practices, to 
keep track of what is being done by carefully devised sets of records, and 
to watch all details of the business in an effort to eliminate leaks and waste 
and to increase profit. 

Between these two extremes with respect to farm management there 
lies an endless array of farms and farm enterprises that use farm manage- 
ment principles in varying degrees. 

Object of Studying Farm Management. — The principal purposes of 
studying farm management are to gain power to analyze the business; 
to devise suitable systems of cropping; to provide economical arrange- 
ment of fields; to adjust field crops to live stock; to utilize capital and 
labor to best advantage; to decide upon suitable plans for keeping simple 
records of the leading projects on the farm; and to carry forward the 
management of the farm and the work of farming in such a manner as to 
give the greatest profit per acre and per worker. 



12 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Fundamentals of Farm Management. — From an analysis of many 
farms and of specific farm enterprises certain fundamental factors have 
been evolved which in a large measure are directly responsible for the 
farmer's success. Some of the more significant of these are: proper size 
of farm business to promote efficient operation of labor, teams, and mach- 
inery; establishment of the principle that American agriculture is based 
on product per man rather than product per acre; importance of the diver- 
sified business which promotes better crop enterprises, insures against 
total loss of income through failure of major crops, makes for better 
utilization of farm labor and for general business stability; importance 
of having live stock that yield an adequate return for the crops fed, and 
of growing crops of sufficient yield to pay more than the fixed cost of 
production; importance of the utilization of capital in the farm busi- 
ness; utilization of equipment properly proportioned to the conduct of the 
given farm; and relation between landlord and tenant, including division 
of income. 

Time Element in Studying Farm Management. — It is the great 
variety of scope and the opportunity to apply original plans to any 
given enterprise that make the study of farm management fascinating 
for the student of agriculture. But results in farm management are 
obtained only from study and thought. The student must take suffi- 
cient time for painstaking consideration, either prior to embarking upon 
an enterprise, or during the actual carrying out of the project. The gains 
from farm management are largely in direct proportion to the effort spent 
in its study and application. A farmer already overworked in trying 
to keep things going will not welcome a suggestion of still greater tax 
upon his time and energy. Later, when he can afford to spread out, 
he should find in farm management a worthy field. 

Field Studies Should Supplement Printed Matter. — To acquire 
proficiency in the subject of farm management, study of printed matter 
should be supplemented, so far as possible, with visits to sections specially 
noted for well-developed practices in farm management. In general, 
the southern and many of the western states do not offer abundant 
examples of farm management in full operation, and better results 
in learning the general principles in return for the time spent can be 
obtained, for instance, in the middle western States such as Kansas, 
Nebraska, Iowa, the western states of California and Oregon, the north- 
eastern States of Michigan and New York, and in states and localities 
where agriculture is well developed, diversified in nature, and sufficiently 
profitable to permit the expanding of the business. On the other hand, 
a farm manager well grounded in the more approved and up-to-date 
methods will find such states as Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, 
the Carolinas, Montana, Arizona, etc., of special interest because of the 
striking contrasts they have to offer. 



GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 13 

Farm Management Terms 

Familiarity with terms common to farm management aids in a better 
understanding of the subject. Terms in general use are: 

Farm Enterprise. — A farm enterprise is any crop, type of live stock, manufacturing 
process, etc., which constitutes a part of the farm business. 

Farm Practice is the handling of all the operations in connection with a given enter- 
prise. If used in an agronomic or a zootechnic sense, the term refers to methods of 
crop production and handling of stock; if to Farm Management, it refers to the 
coordination and execution of the various details in carrying on the entire business. 

A farmstead is that part of the farm set apart for the group of farm buildings 
together with yards or corrals, home orchard, garden, and minor home enterprises, as 
poultry or oees. 

A specialized farm is one which normally derives at least 50 per cent of its receipts 
from one source. 

Terms used in connection with capital. 

Farm capital or farm investment is the average value taken at the beginning and 
ending of the farm year of all real estate, improvements, machinery, live stock, feed, 
supplies, cash, and other investments necessary to carry on a given farm business. 
It includes the value of the farmhouse but not the houshold furnishings. Money 
owed by the farmer is not subtracted. 

Fixed capital is that invested in land, buildings, and relatively permanent fixtures. 

Circulating or working capital is that invested in live stock, machinery, feeds, 
supplies, etc. 

Inventory. — The inventory is a detailed list of farm properties with values assigned. 

Terms used in connection with income. 

Net income or farm income is the difference between gross income and farm ex- 
penses. Net income, therefore, includes both interest on capital and a sum for wages 
or salary of the operator. 

Farm receipts or gross income is the amounts received from sales of farm products, 
increase in inventories of live stock, feed supplies, and receipts from outside labor, 
rent of buildings, etc. 

Direct receipts are the cash or equivalent value received from sale of crops, live 
stock, live-stock products, for labor, and from miscellaneous sources. 

Indirect receipts are the values from increased inventory, or appreciated values of 
any of the various forms of property. 

Farmer's earnings are the sum of the labor income plus what the farm furnishes 
toward the living of the operator and all others living or boarding in the farm home. 

Labor income or operator's labor income is the sum left after deducting from farm 
receipts the three items of farm expenses, interest at the going rate on the average 
farm investment, and unpaid family labor other than the operator's. 

Minus farm income is the sum by which the operator failed to make farm expenses 
and interest on the invested capital. 

Percentage return on investment is the rate of interest received on invested capital 
after deducting all expenses. In the case of the operator it is determined by deducting 
the estimated value of the operator's labor and dividing this result by the amount of 
capital invested. In the case of the landlord, taxes and other necessary expenses are 
deducted. 

Terms used in connection with expenses. 

Farm expenses are moneys paid out during a business year for the purpose of meet- 
ing current expenses other than investments which are necessary to carry on the farm 



14 FARM MANAGEMENT 

business. Expenses cover payment for labor, including board, feed, materials, sup- 
plies, taxes, insurance, repairs and parts, oil, gasoline, etc. Expenses should include 
the value of labor performed by the family plus depreciation of equipment plus 
decreases in inventories of live stock, feed, and supplies. Household or personal 
expenses are not included, as they do not constitute expenses of the business. 

Terms used in connection with occupancy of land. 

An owner is one who owns all of the land that he farms. 

A part owner is one who owns only a part of the farm land that he operates. 

A tenant is one who owns none of the farm land that he operates. 

A cropper is a tenant laborer who furnishes the manual labor of growing a crop, but 
little or no capital. 

A landlord is one who owns land farmed by another. 

Share rent is a system of paying a portion of the crops or stock produced as rent for 
use of farm lands or equipment. 

Cash rent is a system of paying a fixed cash rent for the use of farm lands or 
equipment. 

Cash-share rent is a combination of cash rent and share rent paid for the use of farm 
land and equipment. 

Terms used in connection with labor. 

Family labor is the unpaid farm labor furnished by members of the family, other 
than the operator. 

A man work unit is the average amount of work accomplished by one man in 10 
hours. An acre of hay represents one man work unit because, on the average, approxi- 
mately 10 hours of man labor are required to handle it. An acre of potatoes represents 
10 man work units because, on the average, approximately 100 hours of man labor are 
required to handle it. One dairy cow from which the milk is wholesaled or made into 
butter represents 15 man work units because, on the average, approximately 150 hours 
of man labor are required to handle such cow and her product. It may be desirable 
to vary with the region the number of units assigned to this or that enterprise. 

A horse loork unit is the average amount of work accomplished by one horse in 10 
hours. 

A productive ivork unit or Inhor unit is the time of one man or one horse employed for 
a 10-hour day at productive work in the growing of a crop or the producing of 
stock or stock products. 

Terms used in connection with crops. 

Crop acre is one used for producing some farm crop other than wood or pasture. 
Two crops grown on the same ground means double as many crop acres as land 
cultivated. 

A tillable acre is one suitable for some farm crop other than wood or pasture. 

Diversity index is a measure of the degree of diversification as practiced on the 
individual farm. 

Crop index is a measure of comparison of crop yields on a given farm with the 
average yields of a group of farms operating under similar conditions. The relation- 
ship is expressed in percentage. 

Terms used in connection with live stock. 

An animal unit is the approximate equivalent, from the standpoint of manure 
produced and feed required, of a mature cow or horse. It is customary to count as an 
animal unit 2 head of young cattle or colts, 4 calves, 5 mature hogs, 10 pigs or shoats, 
7 sheep, 14 lambs, or 100 fowls. The term is used for purposes of comparing different 
classes of animals and to compute total amount of live stock on farms. 



GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 15 

A productive animal unit is an animal unit which increases the revenue of the farm 
by its own growth, by producing young, or by some live-stock product as milk or eggs. 

Illustrating use of terms. 

On starting a farm enterprise the value of the investment in the business for land, 
buildings, work stock, implements, seed, feed, cash, etc., is found to be: 

Buildings, land, etc $20,000 (Fixed capital) 

Seed, feed, supplies, cash, etc 6,000 (Working capital) 

$26,000 
At the end of the year the books show : 

Buildings, land, etc $19,800 (Fixed capital) 

Seed, feed, supplies, cash, etc 8,200 (Working capital) 

$28 , 000 
The average of the two inventories is: 

$27,000 (Farm capital) 

The incomes are found to be: 

From sale of products $ 4,800 (Direct receipts) 

From increase in number and value of young stock . 800 (Indirect receipts)- 

$ 5,600 (Gross income or farm 
receipts) 
The expenses are found to be : 

Labor, seed, feed, etc $ 1 ,400 (Direct expenses) 

Depreciation of equipment 300 (Indirect expenses) 

$ 1 , 700 (Farm expenses) 

The difference between the gross receipts 

($5,600) and farm expenses ($1,700) gives $ 3,900 (Net income or farm 

income) 
The operator figures that: 

(a) The value of his labor is $ 1 , 200 

(b) The value of unpaid family other than his own is 400 

(c) Interest at 5 per cent is 1 , 350 

(d) Value of house is $400 and of home-used products 

$450, a total of 850 

He will then find that: 

$ 3,900 (Net income) 
less 1,750 (Combined family labor 
and interest) 



gives him $ 2 , 150 (Labor income) 
which, plus 850 (Value of house and 

home-used products) 
plus 400 (Family labor) 

plus 1,350 (Interest on investment) 



gives a total available for the family of $ 4 , 750 (Total family income) 

Crop index is used to express the crop yields of a particular farm by comparing it 
with the a-verage crop yields of all the farms in the community. 



16 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Example. — A particular farm produces 

1,000 bu. of corn on 20 acres 

600 bu. of wheat on * 20 acres 

450 bu. of oats on 15 acres 

60 tons of hay on 40 acres 

Total 95 acres 

The average yields for these crops in the community are: corn, 60 bu.; wheat, 
32 bu.; oats, 40 bu.; and hay, 1% tons per acre. Hence, on the average, the acres 
required to produce the above quantities of products are: 

1,000 divided by 60 =16.7 acres of corn 

600 divided by 32 = 18 . 8 acres of wheat 

450 divided by 40 =11.3 acres of oats 

60 divided by 1^ =34.3 acres of hay 

Total 81.1 acres 

Ninety-five acres on this farm are required to produce what 81.1 acres produces on 
the average, or one acre output is but 85 per cent of the average, so 85 represents the 
crop index. 



CHAPTER II 
SELECTING FARMING AS AN OCCUPATION 

The desirability of farming as compared with other occupations is 
largely a personal matter and must be determined by the circumstances, 
tastes, and aspirations of the individual concerned. Certain factors of 
general application, however, are touched upon below. 

Stability of Farming. — From the standpoint of stability, safety, and 
profitableness there are considerable differences between farming and other 
lines of business. Farming is, perhaps, more stable and less susceptible 
to serious interruption from disturbances in the financial world than any 
other business. On the other hand, it is, perhaps, more affected by the 
natural elements than any other form of business. 

Farming a Mode of Life.— E. Davenport says, ''Farming is not only 
a business, but a mode of life. Sometimes the business is the prominent 
feature, so successful that life seems to run on as one long sweet song: 
Sometimes the business runs so low that life is a bitter struggle, it would 
often seem, against fate." 

" The best of all on the land," Davenport goes on to say, " is the farmer 
and his family who own and operate a moderate-sized farm — just large 
enough to afford, by thrift and industry, all the comforts and many of the 
luxuries of life, but not large enough to be divided. Here are born and 
brought up typical Americans. May their tribe increase." 

A recent editorial points out the lack of grounds for comparing "big 
farming" and "big business." "The big farmer is in no sense a captain 
of industry. He is a producer, to be sure, but he is tied to standard 
methods much the same as are his less ambitious neighbors. He can 
refine upon them. He can do much by way of better organization. 
Farming is not a business in which a small revolving fund may be made 
to do wonders, nor is it one in which a few great fortunes are made by a 
lucky turn of the wheel as it grinds out the lives of competitors by the 
thousands. Farming is largely the result of individual effort; in other 
words, food is a by-product of life upon the land; the great mass of farmers 
are just folks trying to get along and doing the best they can under all 
sorts of handicaps of health, financial, and family conditions." 

Two Ways to Consider Farming.— Farming may be for the purpose of: 
(a) Providing a home. 
(6) Providing a business. 
2 17 



18 



FARM MANAGEMENT 




Fig. 1. — Near Potters Place, New Hampshire. 




Fig, 2. — Near Greene, New York. 




Fig. 3. — Country farm in southeastern Pottawattamie County, Iowa. 
From rugged granite hills to rolling prairie soils, yet each has its attractions for the 
real farmer. 



SELECTING FARMING AS AN OCCUPATION 19 

In the first instance, principles of farm management may be ignored, 
since the objects of the home are not susceptible to tests by business 
principles. 

Under the second category, however, the principles of farm manage- 
ment fairly demand consideration. 

The intermediate course is also open to the man who looks to the farm 
for a home, but must secure enough returns to keep a family, and possibly 
to make payments on a place purchased on the installment plan, and who 
will need to consider business principles in so far as they bear on his 
securing money enough to meet these obligations. 

As a Home. — -Without going very deeply into the question of the desir- 
ability of the country as a home, there are a few points to which attention 
may be drawn. Reasons for country living are briefly referred to below, 
without any attempt to list in order of importance. 

1. A man working for himself may acquire greater independence than when 
working for another. 

2. There are many opportunities for small investments. 

3. Money properly invested in the country will furnish the investor a maximum of 
employment. 

4. The work is varied and out of doors. 

5. A good wife is a distinct asset on the farm. There is work which women and 
children can do with both profit and pleasure. 

6. There is more chance for a mediocre man to succeed, because there are oppor- 
tunities for employment, small investments, and small businesses. 

7. Agriculture will apparently suffer more abuse through unintelligent operation 
than any other business and still return a living. 

8. Country life brings about closer relationships between men, and results in more 
true friends. 

9. A man's house is his home, and because of that, the farmer usually both makes 
a better citizen and raises better citizens. 

10. The longer a man resides in the country, the more valuable he becomes, since 
the more experience a man has, the greater is his producing value. A man who has 
grown potatoes for ten years can grow them better than the man who has grown 
them but one year. 

Farm Management Draws on Many Sources for Information. — A good 
farm manager is not slow to accept suggestions from any source. Thus 
the ideas of scientists, agricultural writers, business men, laborers, team- 
sters, mechanics, neighbors, are all accepted, digested, and if valuable, 
applied. 

Value of Studying Local Practice. — Great benefit may be derived from 
observance of neighborhood farmers. In any community where agri- 
culture has been established for some time, the prevailing tendency of the 
majority of farmers is to a correct working out of the best methods for 
the existing condition. By studying these methods it may be possible 
to offer simple suggestions for improvement, but on the whole, the funda- 
mental principles will prove sound and reasonable. 



20 FARM MANAGEMENT 

No more liberal education can be found for one wishing to investigate 
a given phase of agriculture than to visit one hundred farmers in a given 
community and make a close investigation of their methods. Greatest 
good, of course, will result from the selection of farms where the operators 
have been established long enough to formulate and prove their policies. 
Thus one would gain less direct information from colonies on a new sub- 
division than from farmers in an old established section where it may be 
the farms have been in the family for several generations. 

Scope of Detailed Information Needed. — A cursory study of the chart 
(Chart 1) presented in the chapter on "General Considerations of 
Farm Management," showing the dependence of farm management upon 
other subjects, will indicate a need for a practical working knowledge of 
{a) existing farm practices, and (b) scientific recommendations for 
improvement. Thoroughly to understand animal husbandry and plant 
industry with their subdivisions of horses, sheep, beef, swine, poultry, 
dairying, field crops, fruit (citrus, deciduous, etc.), berries, vegetables and 
seeds, requires information of the basic subjects on through a long list. 
So too, in order properly to understand and apply farm management 
factors, full knowledge is needed of agricultural economics, rural 
sociology, forestry, ordinary business principles of finance, and similar 
related subjects. Detailed information over a wide range is vital to the 
farm manager. 

A farm manager should possess knowledge of local farming practices — 
prevailing types of agriculture, time and way of preparing seed-beds, 
amount of seed, time of planting, amount of cultivation, time of breeding 
stock, periods of feeding to fatten, etc. He should know the more 
common weeds, rodents, plant diseases, insect pests, and means of con- 
trolling them. He should be familiar with the selection, adjustment, 
and care of farm machines. He needs a knowledge of ordinary methods 
of farm construction — framing of buildings, selection of materials, use of 
concrete, galvanized iron, and other materials. The proper selection 
of size and type of buildings and their placement with relation to one 
another falls to the province of farm management, but bills of materials 
are a part of farm engineering, as are irrigation systems and drains. 
The farm manager should know the outstanding agricultural legislation 
applicable to his community, e.g., fencing laws, trespass laws, right of 
way, taking waters from streams, diverting flood waters, responsibility 
for labor, payment of wages, housing, liability in case of accident, bonding 
laws, regulations covering the output of milk, veal, or other farm products, 
standard market packages, reporting infectious diseases, killing ground 
squirrels, coyotes, prairie dogs, getting rid of barberry, Russian thistle, 
and insect pests. 

Local Practice the Result of Experience. — The better acquainted one 
becomes with the general principles underlying local farm manage- 



SELECTING FARMING AS AN OCCUPATION 21 

ment plans, the more one realizes the necessity for a full acquaintance 
with local conditions, customs, and practices. In any old, well-developed 
community, present practices are, to a large extent, the result of experi- 
ence and its attendant processes of elimination. Illustrations may be 
drawn from the open flat-roofed stock sheds of the southern states in 
contrast with the closed barns and steep-pitched roofs in snow countries; 
range methods in states of open winters in contrast with shed feeding 
in sections of heavy snow-fall. The planting season in the Pacific Coast 
states is at the time when the East is preparing to hibernate. In the 
East help boards with the farmer, in the West they stay in separate 
quarters; the former condition means a larger farm residence, the latter 
requires provision for additional housing. Practices which at first were 
condemned have later been justified, e.g., potato sorting in certain 
sections; shipping apples in boxes instead of in barrels; saving of space 
through kind of shipping package, e.g., peach basket of East compared 
with crate of West; and bulk handling of grain in Middle West compared 
with sacking it in California; methods of loading cows; of selling; of 
handling labor. The negro of the South requires different management 
from that of the Mexican and Spaniard of the Southwest, or the Japanese, 
Hindu, and Indian of the Northwest, and these again require other 
superintendence from that applied to the Norwegian, Dane, or Russian 
of the central states, or the Pole, Italian, and Greek of the Atlantic Coast. 

Gaining Knowledge of Local Conditions. — Too much information can- 
not be had in a chosen locality concerning possible and probable yields, 
market demands for product, gross and net values at farm or ranch, 
percentage of probable crop failures, importance of maintaining soil 
productivity, availability of farm labor, degree of diversification normally 
practiced, extent of local cooperation among farmers, character of 
neighbors, local customs, provision for churches, schools, and libraries, 
etc. A short stay in the neighborhood for conducting quiet inquiry 
among farmers will sometimes suffice; a year's residence as tenant is a 
valuable guide; personal knowledge gained by working as a hand on the 
property or in close contact nearby will often serve; use of County 
Agents' information offers possibilities; inspection of buyers' books 
may reveal several facts; other ways will suggest themselves. 

In reviewing worn-out lands where it is proposed to bring up pro- 
duction by use of fertilizers, green manure crops, live stock farming, or 
rotation methods, assurance that one has sufficient and accurate data is 
especially essential. Proper data of the time element are vital, as in- 
creased yields due to improved methods sometimes are not evident until 
several years. Ignorantly to count upon returns in a year or two which 
cannot possibly be obtained in less than four or five, is likely to result in 
disaster to the operator. 



22 



FARM MANAGEMENT 




Fig. 6. — Brazos River Valley, Bosque County, Texas. 




Fig. 6. — Lower Natches Valley, Washington. 
The appeal of the open country is a first essential to fullest realization of what 
farming has to offer and yet the true farmer appreciates opportunities to do good 
work as well as the visual pleasure afforded by scenes such as these. 



SELECTING FARMING AS AN OCCUPATION 23 

Personal Elements for Success. — In making a success of the farming 
business much stress must necessarily be placed upon the individual. 
There is no given rule to indicate the percentage to be attributed to the 
man himself. It is, however, large. For purposes of study it is safe to 
say that fully 50 per cent of success rests with the individual alone. The 
other 50 per cent covers the conditions of soil, climate, water, and market, 
as available for the chosen industry. 

From the standpoint of the individual there are several elements 
which largely determine his success in agriculture. Among these are : 

1. Knowledge. 

2. Skill. 

3. Energy. 

4. Abiding enthusiasm. 

5. Faith. 

6. Courage. 

7. Responsibility. 

8. Experience. 

If farming is considered as a manufacturing business, for farming is 
under a broad construction the manufacturing of food products, it is 
easy to see how necessary are the qualifications here enumerated. No 
one would think for a moment of success attending his efforts to make 
shoes or print books or construct engines without knowledge of the 
industry, and a keen desire to engage in the business. 

Proof of the need for farm management judgrnent and knowledge is 
available for those who with a fair idea of farm management find occasion 
to try out their knowledge in new communities and in new enterprises. 
For instance, need of knowledge is illustrated by reviewing the "Farms 
for Sale" column in a region unfamiliar to the reader. The need for 
information is startling if one tries to select what is a workable proposition. 
Each locality requires knowledge of possible incomes; to what extent 
native feeds are of value ; source, kind, and amount of farm labor for a given 
community; local practice in housing and boarding help; kinds and value 
of native trees and grasses; extent and character of weed, fungus, and in- 
sect pests; fertilizer practice, etc. 

Skill. — An inquiry into the degree of skill required to do the work is 
a necessary part of the introspection demanded of the man who would 
be a good farmer. To knowledge and experience must be added skill. 
The skillful man is he who, having familiar knowledge, can execute with 
readiness and dexterity. The necessity for knowledge, wisdom, and skill 
in farm management cannot be overestimated. In every farm neighbor- 
hood there are examples of men (1) who are marked by ability, (2) others 
who are clearly unsuccessful as farmers who as markedly fail, and still 
others exhibiting all gradations between success and failure, depending 
far more on the differences in men than on differences in land or in 
materials or opportunities or other conditions. 



24 



FARM MANAGEMENT 




,m*w^' 



'>- .'-i-.-" . 



{^•J'^^M 



Fig. 7. — Dairying in New York State. 




Fig. 8. — Poultry as a specialized business. 




Fig, 9. — A Montana scene. 
Various types of farming, for those who prefer to follow the stock business. 



SELECTING FARMING AS AN OCCUPATION 25 

Energij. — The man who lacks energy or will to work will find farming 
intolerable. Complete success does not attend the lazy man in this 
particular business. He who does not work will not gather. 

Enthusiasm, Faith, and Courage are necessary to complete attainment 
of success. Enthusiasm must be of the lasting kind founded upon cour- 
age and backed by a liking for and faith in the work. Otherwise, a 
man will not be able to weather the periods of low prices, the crop 
failures, the labor troubles, and the thousand and one things which the 
successful farmer is constantly meeting and combating. 

Cuts have been interspersed through the pages of this text to serve 
as tests of personal reactions to farming. Greatest success in farming 
is attained only when the operator is so keenly alive to the "call of the 
land" that he thrills to the mental imprint of a photographic reminder. 
When one glances over these cuts, and does not feel a desire to smell the 
fresh earth, a wish to be out under the bright sun, and a tug at his heart- 
strings, he'd better give a little thought to how far his enthusiasm will 
carry him. 

Experience, listed as last, is fully as important as knowledge, listed 
first. 

No wise person lacking knowledge would think very seriously of 
investing his time and money in the active management of a cotton 
mill, printing office, hotel, wholesale hardware plant, or any similar 
line of business where competition is close. Experience is as necessary 
in farming. If the farm business is large, the experience will take the 
direction of building up a good organization and correlating the different 
business factors. If the business is small, so that the operator does a 
portion or all of the work, he will need experience as to how and when his 
work should be done — pruning, spraying, cultivating, plowing, milking, 
feeding, or whatever details the particular type of business he is interested 
in demands. 

Minimizing Experience. — This subject of experience is worthy of much 
consideration, for of all attributes needed, the beginner in the farming 
business tries hardest to minimize or dodge the value of experience. 

No amount of reading and studying alone will make a good farmer 
any more than one can become a good tennis player or baseball pitcher 
by reading up on the subject. 

To the study must be added experience, for only by actually trying 
one's hand can the necessary knack of doing the work be attained. The 
degree of knack or skill which one must possess cannot be measured, but 
it is vastly important that one develop this attribute to the utmost. 

Thus a city bred man seeing a double team go by will note that they 
wear "harness," but after he has harnessed and unharnessed a few times 
he instinctively notes the details — breeching, hames, breast straps, 
underdraws, throat latch, and the rest. 



26 FARM MANAGEMENT 

/ ^ 

Experience Results in Saving T'tmeir^Experience is necessary not only^ 
to show whether one actually likes tne work or not, but, added to the 
proper course and amount of study, it will largely determine one's success. 
Experience results in saving of time. Thus the inexperienced man will 
take a half hour to harness a team which should be done in five minutes; 
he will consume an hour in doing what should really be ten minutes of 
milking; he will take two hours to do an hour's work around the hog 
pens, or in the harvest. 

Experience Results in More Work. — Experience results in the accom- 
plishment of more work in a given space of time. Repeated effort trains 
mind and muscles and results in the saving of many steps and the utih- 
zation of short cuts. An experienced man acquires a knack or skill 
in pitching hay, or hoeing crops, or irrigating fields, or making small 
repairs, or adjusting machinery, or sharpening tools, all of which reduces 
labor, time and cost. 

Some of the things which come easily and naturally to the experienced 
farmer and look as if anyone could do them, will at the beginning prove 
the new man to be extremely awkward. Certain things will puzzle a 
beginner, as for instance the method of starting plowing in a square 
field, the handling of irrigation water in heavy clay soils, the driving of 
cranky mules, the way to set up a derrick and start a stack, the preparing 
of a grain field for the combined harvester, the packing of fruit. 

Experience Indicates a Daij's Work. — Experience provides the 
measure of what constitutes a day's work. When men must be hired, 
he who has had experience is able to judge as to what he may expect 
from his help, and furthermore, and more valuable, to distinguish those 
men who by their superior skill or knack can accomplish their work more 
easily, more quickly, and better. 

Experience Teaches Labor Conditions. — Actual contact for a while 
with laborers results in a clearer understanding of their points of view and 
a better comprehension of their troubles. Thus a clearer understanding 
will result as to the merit of their complaints. Some keen thinkers are 
to be found among wbrkingmen, and it is well to know something of the 
types represented by the agitator, the disturber, the man with anarchistic 
tendencies, and the general all-round trouble maker. 

Experience acquaints one with local conditions. 

Any lack of training in these details will seriously handicap the 
newcomer. 

Getting Experience. — Several ways are open to gain experience, and 
the method must be determined by the individual. 

Getting Experience as Operator. — A man with capital may go in for 
himself at once and pay for his experience with his own money. Under 
such conditions it is well to consider the advisability of putting aside a 
portion of one's capital for the future and confining these experimental 



SELECTING FARMING AS AN OCCUPATION 27 

activities to the remainder. Then, if mistakes total more than was 
originally estimated, one will have some capital with which to continue 
with a clearer vision, or if the work fails to attract, the means will still 
be available for a return to the old work or a new start in other lines. 

Getting Experience as Employee. — A man may work for a large cor- 
poration engaged in farming. If he is without influence, however, and 
goes in as a common hand, he will find in the majority of cases that his 
training is too narrow and one-sided. Thus, though he should know 
something of the policies directing the work, he will find that he seldom 
or never comes in contact with the men directing it, and his opportuni- 
ties to profit by contact with these people is almost nil. Further, his 
work will consist of a routine set of duties solely pertaining to the de- 
partment in which he works. He will learn to ride, brand, round up, 
cut out, and skin, if in the cattle department; he will learn how to mow, 
pitch, or rake if in hay camp; he will learn fence building in a fence 
crew; or some of the simpler duties in whatever camp or crew he is 
placed. 

It is, of course, possible for the right man in the right position to get 
a good deal of information, especially from contact or conversation with 
old range riders, pioneer workers, and all-round men, but it cannot be 
gainsaid that the usual green man finds his quest for experience and 
information somewhat restricted in corporation employment. One 
must not forget that the capable men are clannish, each somewhat jealous 
of his power, and not especially apt to take up a greenhorn and a new- 
comer. The idea of possible future competition from the newcomer no 
doubt has its influence in part. 

Getting Experience in a Partnership. — A man may take a partner who 
has what the first man lacks. Thus an inexperienced man may secure 
a thorough-going farmer as a partner to supply his lack of farming knowl- 
edge; or a hog raiser or dairymen may cooperate with a man who under- 
stands crops; or a local man with his knowledge of the soil, water, climate, 
markets, and methods of the community, may cooperate with one who 
has secured his knowledge of farming elsewhere. 

The success of such a partnership necessitates at the outset a given 
ideal on the part of both partners — the same goal sought by each. The 
business must be big enough to warrant the constant employment of two 
men, which in turn indicates the necessity of sufficient working capital — 
more than would be required for a one-man business. 

Getting Experience from Suburban Trial. — A plan worthy of considera- 
tion by the family that has never lived on a farm but desires to try 
agriculture, is to rent a small place for a year within commuting distance 
of the present position and try out the proposed life. This way will 
furnish the much needed instruction in the requirements and care of 
crops and stock, it may be the means of preventing an unwise decision, 



28 



FARM MANAGEMENT 




Fig. 10. — A lowly log cabin of the southwest. 




Fig. 11. — A stately mansion of the south. 
In choosing farming as a business the home aspect should not be overlooked. 



SELECTING FARMING AS AN OCCUPATION 29 

and it certainly will curtail mistakes which otherwise might prove too 
costly. 

Many towns are near enough to the open country so that one can 
find a place which will permit a trial of any pet scheme. If one thinks 
he can make a living from a single acre, he should try it in some such 
way as this by determining what can be done during spare time without 
giving up his present employment. In the same way one can learn what 
is needed and what can be done with a small flock of hens, a few hogs, a 
couple of cows, a small truck and berry patch, or even a few fruit trees. 

Incidentally such trial will result in a hardening of city muscles and 
a training of mind and body for a full day's work. 

Suburban Trial Limitations. — -Such experiments will indicate the 
limit of returns possible from such things as bees, rabbits, pigeons, 
mushrooms, and in many cases prevent what on a large scale might prove 
a disappointing venture through lack of knowledge concerning one's 
fitness for the work, amount of capital needed, requirements for the 
successful establishing of the business, receptivity of the market, size of 
the business one can handle, and costs of production. 

An ordinary back yard will, with many industries, offer sufficient area 
for experimenting on a small scale, although one must remember that the 
results obtained with a small unit, i.e., a dozen hens, two or three rabbits, 
100 sq. ft. of truck, one hive of bees, or a single berry vine, cannot with 
safety be applied as a sure test of what will be. forthcoming from a full- 
sized business. Thus one will get far different results from eggs sold to 
the neighbors with fowls getting a full ration of grain and table scraps 
than from the product of a commercial flock sold in the open market. 
And a few rabbits may be sold at good prices to a limited private trade 
where the product in the open market may command less than the cost 
of raising. One may easily make $40 profit from a lot 50 by 100 ft. with 
vegetables raised during spare time, yet to handle two acres might take 
all one's time and at the same rate would return but $675 for the year's 
work. 

In short, the moral is that a small trial is desirable, but results. obtained 
must be applied carefully in gauging the possibilities of the same industry 
on a scale taking all one's time. 

The Best Way to Gain Experience. — The best way to gain experience 
is to secure employment on a small place given to the industry one wishes 
to enter, where one comes in frequent contact with the "boss" — prefer- 
ably working beside him — and can imbibe daily a knowledge of policies 
and methods. The small place may employ only one or two men and 
thus an opportunity is offered for variety and a chance to see the working 
out of the scheme. Usually too, one can thus find better board and 
lodging, and is not thrown in quite so close contact with the foreign ele- 
ment as is the case in corporation employment. 



30 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Pay Secondary to Experience. — In getting experience, pay should be 
a secondary consideration, the main issue being the gaining of the greatest 
amount of training. One can sometimes afford to work for nothing, or at 
most for a few dollars a month, if he can find a successful man willing to 
take him in hand and give him a thorough training in the business. 
The wisdom of such a decision will show in future years. 

Constructive Changes in Employment. — Further, it is well to move from 
place to place and try out the methods of different men, keeping one's 
eyes and ears open for the proper reception of all useful items. Such 
movement must, however, be designed to reach a given goal, be planned 
along constructive lines, and not an erratic, never approaching, rambling, 
shifting from one job to another. The latter is vagabondism, the 
former is preparation. 

Understand that one need not and, in fact, cannot try one's hand at 
all things agriculturally. Thus a good superintendent may not be a prize 
''bronco buster" or "mule skinner." Neither does a foreman need to 
know all about the business end. One must, however, become fully 
acquainted by actually using hand or brain upon his duties and methods 
pertaining to the line of work one expects to take up. 

Personal Introspection Desirable. — To the extent that a man possesses 
the essentials outlined above, just so far will he be able to succeed when 
considering only the influence of individual efforts. If a man be weak 
in one or two qualities, or lacking altogether in a single factor, he will 
not attain full perfection in his results. 

Thus at the very start a little personal introspection is a most desirable 
thing. A man may test his knowledge by means of the paper plan, to 
be discussed later. He can determine his experience by a short review 
of his past history. If he is fair-minded, he can determine Jiis energy 
b^^ast successes in past fields of endeavor. His^enthusiasm, however, 
may be a matter of some speculation. ^ A little trial as a farm hand, or 
by leasing a place, or by a judicious purchase of a small place, will soon 
determine whether or not his inclination toward agriculture is strong 
enough to stand the real test. 

This rather lengthy discussion of the personal attributes is not 
intended to discourage anyone, unless that one's faith is so weak that he 
should be discouraged, but rather to open the eyes to the true status of 
the business. The farming business is a good one. It offers opportunity 
for good profits. It recognizes long terms of capable service in a sub- 
stantial way. It offers a variety of work, a healthful and an enjoyable 
life. One should, however, go into the work with a firm belief that one 
can succeed, backed by knowledge, experience, and capital, and with the 
courage to overcome such obstacles as may arise. 



CHAPTER III 
SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 

The choice of a farm business will be determined largely by circum- 
stances. In general, four factors will be involved in the selection of a 
business. These are (a) the locality and its possibilities in the way of 
producing and disposing of farm products, (6) the available capital, (c) 
the need of capital, for operating expense or family needs, or both, and 
{d) personal inclination and capacity of operator. If a choice is possible 
— i.e., if (a), (6), (c) are none of them inhibitory — (d) will of course settle 
the question. 

Locality Limitations. Environment in Determining Type of Busi- 
ness. — Of the environmental conditions limiting the business, soil and 
climatic conditions are of first importance, because of their relations to 
the kind and quantity of crops that can be grown. Rolling hills not 
susceptible of farming usually' are given over to cattle and sheep. Lands 
which can be tilled are commonly utihzed to better advantage for the 
production of farm crops. Corn must have warm nights. Wheat will 
grow in altitudes too high for either barley or oats. Sugar beets wiU 
resist alkali too strong for growing most crops. Alfalfa requires a deep, 
free, open soil. Apples are grown in calcareous soil. Oranges will 
thrive only under semi-tropical conditions. Pears do best where ample 
moisture is available. Because of the limits upon crops set by soil, 
moisture, and climate, the choice of an industry for a given property 
must first and foremost take into account what products, under the 
given conditions, can be grown. 

Labor in Determining Type of Business. — Then follows as close a 
study of labor. Crops like sugar beets, cotton, hemp, and small fruits, are 
limited, even when growing conditions are good, by the available labor. 
Dairjang to suceed relies upon competent steady milkers. 

Markets in Determining Type of Business. — All conditions surround- 
ing the growing and finishing of the possible products need careful 
investigation to determine the limitations or advantages surrounding 
production. And once production is assured, the matter of marketing 
must be determined. There are good reasons why commercial truck 
gardening is mostly confined to land lying close to centers of population, 
why fruit for canning is best grown near canneries, why sections remote 
from markets must raise products of high unit value to justify the long 
haul. 

31 



32 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Capital Limitations. — The extent of available capital influences the 
choice of an industry. Insufficient capital is usually the rule, so that 
some temporary postponement or alteration of the final scheme may be 




Fig. 12. — A family truck garden of a couple of acres growing vegetables for retail. 




Fig. 13. — Extensive market garden section producing solely for wholesale trade. 

(New York.) 
Trucking or market gardening is a common type of intensive farming on limited 
acreages although it varies in magnitude from the local market garden of but an acre or 
two situated close to a direct market, to hundreds of acres utilizing much labor in the 
large-scale growing of vegetables for wholesale shipment. Requires nearness to a 
satisfactory market, hard work and attention to the details of plant requirements. 

necessary. Such changes must be worked out according to the individual 
case. It is not difficult for any student of farm management to demon- 
strate that consideration of the available capital must be included in 
making the final choice. 



SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 



33 



Income Limitations. — Before the final analysis is completed as to 
what business to select, the factor of necessary or desired income must be 
considered. Is there a clear need for augmented income? Or does 
one possess the ability and, willingness to get along with less than 
ordinary requirements? The answers to such questions often decide 
the choice of business. 

Different businesses have variable earning capacities. The need to 
obtain operating capital or to meet unusual family requirements must 
be weighed before the final decision is made. The influence of the type 
of business upon income is illustrated in the varying returns from different 
products. For a certain section data are available^ for 1919 showing the 
usual yields, operating costs, and net income for different crops. Given 
a starting point of twenty acres capable of producing usual commercial 
yields, the difference in income is considerable: 

Table 4. — Showinq Returns in Round Numbers of Selected California Crops, 
1919 Data, From 20 Acres 



Gross returns 



Sum over 
operating costs 



Citrus fruit 

Orange 

Deciduous fruit 

Walnut 

Prune 

Peach 

Pear •. . 

Field crops 

Rice 

Sugar beets. . . . 

Grain sorghum 

Wheat 

Truck crops 

Sweet potatoes 

Tomatoes 

Potatoes 



$6,900 



$2,300 



6,200 


4,000 


9,600 


6,800 


7,800 


5,300 


7,500 


2,600 


2,750 


1,300 


2,700 


1,500 


720 


280 


500 


260 


3,600 


1,700 


4,600 


1,250 


2,200 


680 



Personal Inclination. — When more than one industry is possible, 
personal inclination will be the deciding factor. People generally have 
strong feelings either for or against some particular farm business, as, 
for instance, hog production, the details of fruit growing, raising poul- 
try, riding range, growing field crops, running a dairy. The influence of 
personal inclination must be weighed solely by the individual. Dairying 
requires attention 365 days out of the year. Cows must be milked, 
housed, fed, and bred. Poultry is also a year-round job; details of brood- 
ing, (or of incubation), feeding, cleaning, collecting and weighing eggs, 



34 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



must be followed day in and day out. The fruit industry requires a 
knowledge of tree growth to insure proper pruning, a watch for and treat- 
ment of many insect and fungus troubles, care in picking, marketing, and 
shipping, while the range has a fascination for the outdoor man who likes 
to ride. Some industries are not particularly confining; e.g., many fruit 
and field crops. This greater freedom is often attractive. 

Inventory of Personal Preferences. — Because personal preference is a 
prime factor in making the decision, the prospective farmer will find it not 
only interesting but extremely useful to draw up an inventory of the 
advantages and disadvantages of any proposed business. This is best 
made in the form of parallel columns, one for and one against the pro- 
posed choice. 

For illustration sample inventories made up in this way are subjoined. 
One covers swine production; the other a combination of pears and 
table grapes — a specialized fruit farm. 



Example of Specimen Inventory of Swine Production Based on Personal 

Reference 



Advantages 

1. Quick cash returns. • 

Within a year bred sows will provide 
an income. 

2. Small capital required. 

The business ranks with the less de- 
manding of the agricultural enterprises 
as to capital needs both in developing 
and in carrying on. 

3. Utilization of many feeds. 

Often a source of use for grains not 
otherwise marketable or of skim milk, 
waste fruits, carcasses. 

4. Market receptivity. 

A staple product and ordinarily readily 
saleable as fat stock, breeders, or 
feeders: local buyers usually available. 



Objections 

1. Most economical gains require ample 
forage. 

Constant maintaining of pasture may 
be difficult: winter feeding may offer 
obstacles. 

2. Concentrates necessary for fattening. 
If high priced conceritrates must be 
purchased, care is needed to buy to 
advantage so that the margin of profit 
will be preserved. 

3. Susceptibility of disease. Especially 
cholera, pneumonia, tuberculosis. 

4. Cost of vaccinating. When cholera is 
present. 

5. Irregular and sudden fluctuations. 
Rather difficult to foretell market 
changes: these may at times reach ex- 
tremes prohibitive of profit taking: 
local buyers sometimes a disadvantage. 

6. Attendance. 

The work calls for constant and faith- 
ful effort : may tend to become irksome. 



SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 



Example of Specimen Inventory of Pear and Table Grape Production Based 

ON Personal Values 



Objections 

1. Long time to establish. 

If a start is made with bare land, 
several years must elapse before 
returns from the crops are obtained. 

2. Capital investment large. 

Good fruit land usually commands 
a premium: if operator starts with 
bare land the length of time to estab- 
hsh requires heavy expenditures un- 
less intercrops and companion crops 
and industries are unusually profitable. 

3. Nuisance of pest control. 

As leaf hopper, mildew, phylloxera, 
fire blight, slugs, codling moth, certain 
details of which must be handled 
under unpleasant working conditions. 

4. Transportation sometimes difficult. 
Fresh fruit is sometimes perishable 
and sometimes suffers losses: often 
specially constructed cars needed. 

5. Packing requires care. 

Market and shipping demands com- 
bine to limit type and to determine 
cost of package. 

6. Storage necessary if holding of fresh 
fruit is required. 

Refrigeration is costly and losses 
increase with delay in selling. 

7. Heavy depreciation of certain equip- 
ment. 

Trays, lugboxes, spray machines, etc., 
suffer a high rate of depreciation. 



In the examples given above no extensive presentation is attempted. 
The items listed are sufficient to show the idea. 

The Deciding Factor. — When a student finally completes such a list, 
it will be found that one item distinctly stands out as paramount in im- 
portance. The item is either an advantage or an objection. Other 
items dwindle into less significance. Upon this outcome will largely 
rest final decision as to whether the enterprise shall be accepted or 
rejected. 

Studying the Personal Factor. — To find out the reason why the 
farmers in any group have chosen each his own particular business, is 
itself a liberal aid either in making your own selection or in determining 
the fundamentals which should govern you in later choosing a farm 
business. 



Advantages 

1. Profits are large. 

Both direct sales and the premium on 
land values due to the presence of the 
orchard combine to make for substan- 
tial profits. 

2. Steady market. 

Pears and table grapes are accorded a 
stable and receptive market. 

3. Variety of uses. 

In some sections and with some varie- 
ties, grapes can be used for raisins or 
syrup: ditto pears can be dried, canned 
or sold fresh. 

4. Work is not confining. 

Since the requirements are largely 
seasonal periods of labor alternate with 
periods of rest. 

5. Work is interesting. Because variable: 
operations change with the seasons. 

6. Equipment needs are simple. 
Implements and farm machinery are 
relatively small in number and low in 
costs. 

7. Maintenance of productivity simplified. 
Uses of cover and green manure crops, 
stable manures and commercial fer- 
tilizers are possible and the costs 
justified because of the high value of 
the output. 



36 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



What is it, for instance, in a man's personality that makes for a 
successful poultryman, stockman, grain grower, orchardman, truck 
gardener, cottonplanter, haygrower? How much is traceable to person- 
ality and how much is due to lack of capital? Would a man who goes into 
poultry because he has only enough capital for that business be as suc- 
cessful in stock, if he were able to command the vastly greater capital 
required for equal profits? Could a good grain grower or potatoman or 
hop producer be as successful in fruit growing if he had happened to 
select the latter instead of the former? Probably most men have 
sufficient elasticity in their makeup to permit a degree of success along 
several lines, although each will usually do best in some particular line. 




Fig. 14. — Poultry and egg production. 

A business adapted to small acreages and limited capital; susceptible of quick returns but necessitat- 
ing a knowledge of poultry requirements, constant attention to detail, a satisfactory market, and 
reasonably priced feeds. 



Different Farm Businesses Make Different Demands-. — The demands 
of different businesses vary. For instance, running a stock ranch calls 
for different requirements from that of orcharding. The foraier is 
beset with problems of breeding, feeding, marketing, keeping up fences, 
insuring water, fighting occasional disease. The latter is a business of 
great detail, from time of preparing the land for planting, through the 
several years of selecting trees, planting, pruning, controlling pests by 
spraying, fumigating, cutting out, sometimes irrigating, sometimes 
smudging, until harvest commences, when the details of picking, sorting, 
packing, drying, curing, and processing are to be met; together with 
problems of maintenance of soil quality, cooperation, and standardization. 

The two businesses call for different capacities . 

The poultry business is a 365-day-a-year job of rearing, feeding, 
collecting eggs, marketing, and sanitation, a business of many details. 



SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 37 

On the other hand, the grain-growing business as usually carried on is 
divided into two well-defined periods of 2 or 3 months each, hard work 
and lots of it while it lasts, plowing, preparing seed bed, seeding, an 
occasional rolling or harrowing, then a long interval of growing by 
the crop and waiting by the rancher until the harvest starts with the 
binding, or heading, and followed by the threshing, or the whole thing 
at once with a "combined." 

The financial side is reflected in small holdings of men capable of 
bigger things but handicapped by lack of capital; in occasional examples 
of relatives and legatees farming holdings beyond their capacity; in 
corporations financing large projects; in reclamation schemes of irri- 
gation, drainage, protection from overflow, clearing of land; and finally 
in examples of farms handled by men actually possessing sufficient capital 
to meet the needs of their businesses. 

All these four factors have their bearing, and one must be balanced 
against the others. Need for large income may require that personal 
preference take second place. Lack of capital may necessitate choice of 
a business of lesser income possibilities. A liking for animal husbandry 
means that personal desire must give way to the business best suited to 
existing conditions, if the locality is far and away better adapted to 
the production of field crops. 

For the person who has the whole country to choose from, the same 
factors enter into the choice of a business, only more leeway exists. 
Personal preference, need of income, and available capital all have their 
influence. But in addition more elasticity in choice is possible. 

When a Choice Is Possible. — If a choice of industries is possible, the 
selection will be simplified by a decision based upon either (a) a given 
locality, or (6) a given business. 

A great many details must be considered in the selection of a farm, 
but in general, it is necessary first to settle upon either the industry or 
the location, when choice is possible. 

When Type of Fanning Determines Choice. — If one wishes to raise 
citrus fruits one must go where climatic and soil conditions are right for 
their growth. This means in the United States, Florida, or the warmer 
parts of California. Or he may desire to raise sugar beets, which grow 
best in the cool altitudes, along the Pacific Coast, or in the more northern 
tier of states, on rich, level lands. In the first case he must avoid the 
cooler climates for the sake of the crop he wishes to grow. In the second 
case, he may like the warmer climates, but will be forced to forego them 
if he is to give the sugar beets the benefit of the conditions best suited to 
them. Or if raising cattle or sheep is the desired object, the operator must 
go where land is cheap, thereby perhaps sacrificing a natural inclination to 
live near some city. Specialization on the production of flowers or 
small fruits will compel residing near a market, thus perhaps sacrificing 
natural tastes for back country conditions. 



38 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



When Locality Determines Choice. — On the other hand, if one is not 
particular as to a crop but either desires or is obliged to select a certain 
climate or a certain locality, choice of industry must be based on the 



w 


yLiy 


1 liiiiiM 






1^2^^^^^ 


r-^^^^ 














■■'V' .. : " 




^K^ *^^9^P^MnHHli8^^^H^I 



Fig. 15. — Hay harvest. 




Fig. 16. — Barley harvest. 
Field crops — a business of unusual safety because of its opportunity for diversifica- 
tion, the annual nature of the usual crops and the stability of the market: not exacting 
as to detail; acreage needs and capital requirements are intermediate. Knowledge of 
crop needs perhaps easiest to gain. 

possibilities where one intends to settle. This may be poultry, or dairying, 
or vegetables, or some other of the things most generally grown in that 
section, or it may be general farming, stock raising, or field crops. 



SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 39 

There is, of course, the added possibility of finding the locality or 
climate where one desires to operate combined with conditions suitable 
for following a favorite industry. 

Manij Local Examples. — Farm management students anywhere in any 
state can find many examples of the influence of local conditions, personal 
demands, and financial limitations operating in making a final selection 
of the farm business. Personal desire and capacity are illustrated when 
one becomes fully acquainted with the farmers in a community and learns 
the reasons governing the final selection of their businesses. 

Examples of Conditions Limiting the Industry. Citrus — The Highest 
Type of Agriculture. — In point of expert care, constant attention, and 
selling organization, citrus culture is perhaps the highest form of agri- 
culture. A man to succeed with oranges or lemons must be a careful, 
conscientious grower, an all-round business man, a close student of 
detail, well informed concerning physiology, growth, need for plant foods, 
and expert in the control of pests. 

The production of citrus is limited by three outstanding factors: 
(a) A temperature of not less than 30°F. at any time of the year, with 
special requirements as to humidity, wind, and high temperature, (6) 
sufficient water for the needs of the trees, which, being evergreen, require 
a constant supply in optimum amounts according to conditions of soil, 
temperature, and humidity, (c) good drainage, since a high water table, 
stagnant water, or rise of alkali is fatal to citrus culture. The cost of 
production is very high. Probably the highest investment per acre, 
in commercial agriculture, together with heaviest operating costs, is 
to be found in the citrus business, and only the best conditions will 
produce returns sufficient to warrant the financial demands of the 
crop. 

Vegetable Gardening Requirements. — The selection of truck growing ne- 
cessitates soils of high producing power, ample hand labor, a convenient 
and receptive market, and, usually, plans for maintaining the crop 
producing power of the land. 

Beef Production Requirements. — Beef production is best conducted 
where ample feed and drinking water are available and disease is at a 
minimum. 

Field Crops Requirements. — For most crops and stock the require- 
ments on the side of soil, climate, handling, labor, markets, etc., limit 
the production to certain more or less defined areas. This statement 
holds especially true for such crops as sugar beets, hops, alfalfa, wheat, 
cotton, hemp, and, in less degree, since the production of crops determines 
stock industries, it holds for beef, sheep, dairying, hogs, poultry, and 
other stock businesses. 

Volunteer Hay — The Lowest Type of Agriculture. — Cutting volunteer 
hay from wild growth is probably the lowest type of field farming. Range 



40 FARM MANAGEMENT 

production of cattle is a close second to prairie or volunteer hay produc- 
tion as an example of the low extreme of farming, while western grain 
production under methods of shallow plowing, broadcasting, and harvest- 
ing does not stand very high in the scale of exacting farming. Successful 
deciduous fruit and nut production on the other hand, is a close second 
to citrus in its demand for wise and expert handling. So, too, but to 
a somewhat lesser extent, are sugar beets, sugar cane, many truck crops 
and the commercial production of field seeds. 

Agricultural Regions of the United States. — How it works out in 
actual practice is shown by the accompanying map, drawn for me in 1919, 
by members of the federal Office of Farm Management.*' There are, of 
course, minor areas and individual exceptions, but as an illustration of the 
general limitation of cropping belts, the sketch is pointedly interesting 
and valuable . 

According to the country-wide studies of these investigators American 
agriculture has resolved itself into 11 fairly distinct types. These 
outstanding types have developed in their respective belts or zones as 
the results of climate, topography, soil, water conditions, circumstances of 
transportation and marketing, traditions and the tastes and personal 
inclinations of operators. 

1. Dairy Region. — Dairying is the predominating type of agriculture 
in this region, although there are also many other enterprises, such as 
fruit, potatoes, sugar beets, and beans. The western part of this region 
differs from the eastern in that it includes cut-over districts. 

2. Corn Belt. — The agriculture of this region centers around the pro- 
duction of corn. The feeding of live stock is an important feature. The 
section south and east of the dotted line is not so suitable for corn 
on account of less favorable soil conditions; hence the agriculture is 
more varied. 

3. Central Atlantic Region. — The latitude, topography, and soil con- 
ditions combine to make this a distinct agricultural region. Three- 
fourths of the entire tobacco crop is grown in this region. Bluegrass 
pastures on the limestone soils, apple orchards in the Appalachian 
Mountains, and peanut and truck districts near the coast, are distin- 
guishing features. 

4. Cotton Belt. — The agriculture of this region centers upon cotton. 
In a few localities other enterprises are well developed, such as citrus 
fruits in Florida, truck crops in Florida and along the Atlantic Coast, 
sugar-cane in Louisiana, and rice in Louisiana and Texas. The dotted 
line separates the light sandy soils of the Coastal Plain from the heavier 
clays and clay loams of the Piedmont. 

5. Plains Region. — Topography, rainfall, etc., combine to make this 
a distinct agricultural region. Wheat, oats, barley, and flax are impor- 
tant crops in the northern three-fourths of the region, while sorghums 



SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 



41 



^■HXA\ 



\%\^ 



>= 



Cj o 

O 51 



uJ 



I'-'.V 



cO 



B' 



[tO] 



^ V 






? 



^(^. 



5: ^-. 



01 



q: 



f ^-^ 


^ 


x^>. 


z / 









I 


— " 


^ 
C^ 




-\ 


^ 


r {A 


V 


Tl - 






r 


Z 


ic: 




cc^^ 


< 


< 

Q 


< 

Q 

1 L 




is^ 



—1/ 



o 



e 



^^ 



) ^ --i2 






--:<MK)XJ-''>V»t~-OD 



oooc 



42 FARM MANAGEMENT 

such as kafir and milo are grown in the southern part. Native vegetation 
is utiHzed in the production of hve stock. Much of the grain is grown 
by dry farming methods. 

6. Inter-mountain Area. — A variety of crops mostly grown under 
irrigation in the valleys. Small grains by dry farming methods. Live 
stock under range conditions. 

7. Southwest Area. — Climatic differences due to latitude separate 
this area from 6. A variety of crops mostly grown by irrigation. Live 
stock production under range conditions. Truck in southern Texas. 
Much waste land. 

8. Desert Area. — A comparatively large part of this region is waste 
desert. Crops are grown in many small areas where water is available 
for irrigation. Live stock is produced under range conditions. 

9. California Area. — The geographic position of California makes it 
an agricultural region by itself. There is wide variation in the agri- 
cultural products, from those that require semitropical conditions to 
those that are entirely hardy in more northern latitudes. 

10 and IL Columbia Basin and the Pacific Northwest. — The geographic 
position and the more or less distinct types of agriculture make these 
separate regions. The difference is largely due to climatic influences. 
The section west of the Cascade Mountains (indicated by the dotted 
line) has a heavy rainfall and is very different agriculturally from the 
region east of the Cascades. 

Tabulating Locality Possibilities and Limitations. — Choice of a farm 
business, in so far as it rests upon locality possibilities and limitations, 
can be materially simplified by drawing up a set of tables, one for each 
business, and listing in separate columns the advantages and objections 
as they come to mind. Advantages and disadvantages are usually 
purely personal matters and vary in intensity and order. They even 
interchange places when gauged by different individuals. 

Considerable time may be necessary for completing these tables, 
and often field trips and first hand study are necessary to augment know- 
ledge before a final selection is made. Any delay, however, for purposes 
of better informing oneself or better permitting the drawing of accurate 
deductions constitutes a factor of safety which should not be ignored. 

Example of Locality Limitations and Possibilities. Chester County, 
Pennsylvania. — As an example how to present conditions for and against 
farm enterprises, a table from Professional Paper 341, from the Office of 
Farm Management ^ presents in a graphic form findings for Chester 
County, Pennsylvania. 



SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 



43 



Table 5.— Illustrating Favorable and Unfavorable Conditions Affecting 
Types of Farming, Chester County, Pennsylvania 



Enterprise 



Favorable conditions 



Unfavorable conditions 



Dairy 

Hay 

Potatoes 

Wheat 

Poultry 

Hothouse products 
Hogs 

Corn 

Truck crops 

Fruit 

Beef cattle 

Sheep 

Oats 



Good markets; excellent pas- 
tures; hay; corn; size of 
farms; character of labor 
gives winter employment. 

High prices; usefulness as 
feed; soil; climate. 

Nearness to markets; climate 
favorable; distributes labor 

Soil; nurse crop for grasses; 
seasonal distribution of 
labor; furnishes bedding. 

Excellent markets; soil; cli- 
mate; production of home 
supplies; utilization of spare 
time and waste materials. 

Nearby great city; provide 
winter work. 

Good market; pastures. 



Good market; usefulness as 
fuel; soil; climate. 

Good market; home supplies, 

Good market; home supplies. 

Good market; crops; pas- 
tures, climate. 

Good market; crops; pas- 
tures; climate. 



Value as feed. 



High price of hay and grain. 



Short season of employment. 

Prices variable; low yields; 
soil. 

Small farms; western compe- 
tition; small profit per acre. 

Competition from small 
flocks everywhere. 



Diseases; danger of over- 
production. 

High price of concentrates; 
danger from cholera; compe- 
tition with dairying; lack 
of skim- milk. • 

Furnishes no profitable em- 
ployment from July to late 
September. 

Competition of better nearby 
soils. 

Soil; topography; fluctuation 
of production and prices. 

High price of feed ; smallness 
of farms; competition with 
dairying. 

High price of feed; smallness 
of farms; parasites; dogs; 
competition with dairying; 
small percent of non-arable 
land. 

Climate; small value per 
acre; poor nurse crop. 



This is clear evidence that many conditions, some favorable, others 
unfavorable, influence type of farming. The adaptation of crops to 
soil and climatic conditions; crop yields; the price of products; markets; 
cost of feed; availability, cost, and seasonal distribution of labor; the 
ravages of insects and of plant and animal diseases; all have their influence 
in determining type of farming in any locality. 



44 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



On Muck Lands of Indiana and Michigan. — On muck lands frost is 
an important determining factor. The growing season on such soil is 
considerably shorter than on other soils in the same region. In northern 
Indiana and southern Michigan the earliest frost on these lands sometimes 
occurs as early as September 1st, and the latest as late as June 10th. 

These conditions have been summarized for the more important 
muck-farm enterprises of this region. 



Table 6. — Illustrating Favorable and Unfavorable Conditions Affecting 
Types of Farming on Muck Land in Northern Indiana and 

Southern Michigan^ 



Farm enterprise 


Favorable conditions 


Unfavorable conditions 


Com 


Good yield and price, labor 
cost low. 

High yield per acre and 
possibility of very large 
income per acre. 

Muck soil best for celery; 
large income per acre. 

Muck soil best for pepper- 
mint; possibility for very 
large income per acre with 
moderate amount of labor. 

Easy to plant, cultivate, and 
harvest potatoes on muck. 

Yield good; price fair; labor 
cost very low. 

Yield and price fair; labor 
cost low; good feed. 

Good yield; price stable; 
labor cost low. 

Good value as feed. 
Good income per acre. 

Possibility of good income 
per acre. 

Good pasture and abund- 
ance of feed crops; value of 
manure. 


Danger of frost in spring and 


Onions 


fall; weeds frequently 
troublesome. 
Fluctuation in price great; 


Celery 


weeds hard to control; large 
amount of labor required; 
insect enemies. 
Large amount of labor re- 


Peppermint 


quired; danger of bhght 
and rotting; price unstable. 
Demand very limited; fluc- 
tuation in price great; ex- 
pensive equipment needed. 

Market discrimination 


Potatoes 


Hay 


against muck potatoes. 

QuaUty of muck hay some- 
times poor due to rust. 

Danger of frost in spring; and 
lodging at harvest time. 

Frequently heaves badly in 
winter, hard to get firm seed 
bed. 

Yield and price usually low. 

Large amount of skilled labor 


Oats 


Wheat 


Rye 


Hemp 


Cabbage 


required. 

Fluctuation in price; danger 
of rotting; large labor re- 
quirements. 

High price of feed. 


Live stock 





SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 



45 



Ellis County, Texas. — The following diagram, showing factors affecting 
the principal enterprises, is for Ellis County, Texas :^ • 

Table 7. — Illustrating Factors Affecting Profitableness of Enterprises, 

Ellis County, Texas 



Enterprise 


Favorable conditions 


Unfavorable conditions 


Cotton 


Cash crop, fair profit; a- 


Adverse effect upon succeed- 




dapted to soil and climate; 


ing crops; uneven distribu- 




favorable market condi- 


tion of labor; keeps children 




tions; utilizes labor of whole 


from school for picking ; small 




family; size of farm; low 


percentage horse labor util- 




machinery requirements. 


ized; root rot. 


Com 


Feed crop; supplements cot- 


Adverse effect upon suc- 




ton in labor distribution; 


ceeding crops; local market 




soil. 


limited. 


Oats 


Utilizes labor otherwise un- 


Climatic conditions — ■ 




used; winter pasture. 


drought, smut, rust; big 
machinery requirements; 
requires large amount of 
labor for harvesting and 
thrashing. 




A sure crop; hay ; good yields; 


Limited market; adverse ef- 




drought resistant. 


fect upon succeeding crops; 
very difficult to handle. 


Wheat 




CHmatic conditions; large 
labor requirements for 










thrashing; requires big 






machinery. 


Alfalfa 


Improves soil; even labor 
distribution ; fair yields. 


Limited market; root rot; 
presence of Johnson grass; 








drought. 


Stock 


Utilizes waste feed; soil 


Limited pasture; less pro- 
fitable than cotton; poor 




improvement; furnishes 




supplies for home con- 


quality. 




sumption. 





Extensive Farming More Stable. — As a rule, those enterprises that 
are of large extent such as corn, wheat, hay, dairying, and hog raising, 
are less subject to wide fluctuations in prices than those less extensive, 
such as truck farming, hop culture, fruit growing, and potato culture. 
It is seldom wise to base the business of a farm entirely on enterprises 
that are subject to violent fluctuations in prices. 

Ninety Per Cent of Farm Lands in Twelve Crops. — It is important to 
bear in mind that but 12 crops constitute over 90 per cent of the total 
crop acreage of the United States. Oranges, walnuts, other fruits and nuts, 
are, in point of acreage, of less importance agriculturally to the United 
States than the field crops of wheat, corn, oats, barley, rye, buckwheat, 



46 FARM MANAGEMENT 

flaxseed, potatoes, hay, cotton, rice, and tobacco. The total acreage in 
crops is about 311,000,000; of which about 280,000 000 acres are in these 
12 crops. 



Fig. 17. — Dairying, a business of regular and quick returns, flexible as to size and 
capital requirements; but requiring a market for the product, proper feed conditions, 
daily attention to the needs of the cows and a sympathetic understanding of stock. 



Summary of Factors Determining Desirability of a Farm Enterprise. — 
The factors which must be taken into consideration in determining the 
desirability of an enterprise in any given case may be summarized as 
follows : 

1. Profitableness, as determined by general and by local experience. 

2. The extent and distribution of the enterprise. This has much to 
do with determining stability of the supply and demand. 

3. Location with reference to markets. 

4. Conditions existing in the market centers, as combinations of 
dealers to control prices. 

5. Soil and climatic conditions. 

6. Cost of equipment required. 

7. Amount and character of labor required. 

8. Seasonal distribution of labor. 

9. Extent of possible market for the product and the probable effect 
of a considerable increase in the supply on market prices. 

10. Effect of the enterprise on the productivity of the soil. 
In an extended treatise on farm management each of the principal 
agricultural enterprises could be considered in detail from the standpoint 
of each of the foregoing factors.^" 

Where a choice is possible, the type of farming should conform to the 
conditions on the individual farm. Crop farming, as a rule, requires 



• SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 47 

less capital, and is much more simple to master and practice than is 
live stock farming. The keeping of live stock is an advantage, however, 
to utilize feed that would otherwise be wasted, while the manure is, in 
most communities, a distinct asset. 

Established Sections Have Advantages. — In general it will pay to go 
where the particular industry to be followed is already established. By 
going to a grain section to raise grain advantage is gained of harvesters, 
warehouses, freight rates, and similar established assets. In the same 
way, the different agricultural industries, where broad enough to warrant 
it, have drawn to themselves the best facilities for caring for, disposing 
of, and shipping their crops. Buyers go to the centralized industries and 
compete for the products. Creameries and factories for making cheese, 
evaporated milk, albumen, milk sugar, and casein reach into well estab- 
lished dairy sections; fruit packing houses and canneries spring up in 
fruit and vegetable districts; commission men establish branch quarters 
in the field crop districts; elevators are built in the grain growing districts; 
sugar mills are erected where cane or beets are grown. Shipping facilities 
improve when local output becomes large enough to be worth while. 
Laborers go where industries are centralized and steady employment 
more or less assured. 

Diversified vs. Specialized Farming. Change in Status of Farmers. — 
Up to recent years the farmer strove to live on the products of his farm. 
It was then the practice of the farmer to produce as much as possible 
from his own lands of things needed by his farm and his family. 

During the past few years the farmer has been drawn more extensively 
into commercial relationships and businesses. His farming is being 
brought closer to the same principles which underlie all business 
undertakings. 

This is the result largely of the farmer's receiving more nearly ade- 
quate returns for his product so that he has been able to catch up with his 
work and reap some of the just returns for his investment in lands, live 
stock, and equipment, and for his labor — physical and mental. When a 
man had to hustle from daylight till long after dark merely to make a 
bare living he had little time to worry about the scientific aspects of his 
work, or the business principles underlying it. When his returns became 
more nearly adequate, he began to have opportunity to think over his 
work, and particularly and more to the point, he could get far enough 
ahead in his bank account to furnish the funds required for bringing about 
changes in his schemes of operation. 

Decline of the Self-supporting Farm. — As a result of more prosperous 
times the self-supporting farm has today largely given way to the general 
or specialized farm. In other words, where the farmer formerly lived on 
the products of his farm, he now lives upon the profits. 



48 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Classification of Present-day Farming. — Today the different combina- 
tions of agricultural enterprise may readily be considered as falling into 
four general classes: 

(a) The farm which makes a specialty of one crop or one industry, 
as peaches, apples, seed production, cotton, corn, barley, beans, grapes, 
nursery stock, dairying, hogs, beef cattle. 

(6) The second class of farm uses a combination of industries which 
are closely correlated and any one of which is essential to the profitable- 
ness of the whole undertaking. 

Examples of this class are dairying with the attendant production of alfalfa, 
pasture, and possibly grain; beef cattle combined with grain raising, natural pasture, 
and alfalfa hay production; dairj^ing with hogs on the side and alfalfa for feed; sugar 
beets, grain, and beans, in rotation; potatoes, grain, and alfaKa for maintaining crop 
production; hogs with alfalfa and grain production. 

(c) The third class of farm is organized with several departments 
each producing its independent share of the total income. 

Examples of this class are farms producing tobacco, beef and pork; or sugar beets, 
apples and dairy products; or hops, wool, lambs, and grain hay; or fruit, poultry 
products, and truck. These farms, being of a diversified nature, vary in their 
organization through wide extremes. As a group they constitute the most common 
type of farming. 

{d) The fourth class covers more particularly the larger agricultural 
enterprises such as corporation and company farming, and also the farms 
and ranches large enough to maintain several industries not particularly 
closely related. 

One western enterprise of 1,000,000 acres is outstanding. "■ Ranches of this cor- 
poration raise grain on large acreages not only for local needs of work stock, feeding 
and fattening cattle, but also for sale. They breed, rear, and fatten thousands of 
cattle, sending them to a market where they maintain their own abattoir and retail 
trade routes. Smaller ranch abattoirs are also maintained at two country points 
which take care of the inferior cattle. Four dairies of 200 cows each are located at 
different points on the property. During a single year for experimental purposes they 
raised 40 acres of rice, 100 acres of sugar beets, patches of popcorn and peanuts, 
plantings of shallu, feterita, and common sorghum, dwarf and standard kafirs, teosinte, 
milo maize, and Jerusalem artichokes. The breeding and sale of horses is an import- 
ant industry. Orchards and gardens occupy a prominent position, although the sale 
of products outside of apples and prunes is not great, since the local consumption by 
2,600 employees requires large quantities of fresh and dried fruits and green vegetables. 
The making of vinegar and cider, the drying of grapes for raisins, the production of 
apples, peaches, pears, prunes and figs, offer a wide range of horticultural activities, 
many of which are complete in themselves without reference to any other industry. 
Rice, peanuts, sugar beets, drying fruit, and the hke, are not absolutely essential to the 
raising of cattle, yet in a way they lend themselves to the general scheme, either as 
food for the men or as partial feed for cattle. The tops of the sugar beets and the 
stubble of the rice, for instance, are most valuable feeds even after selling the sugar 

*Miller and Lux Inc., California, Nevada and Oregon. 



SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 



49 




Fig. 18. — Sheep production. 

A business handled under either range or farm conditions for production of wool and meat, 
a small flock proposition as a side issue or on a range scale of hundreds of head. 



Either 




Fig. 19. — Beef production and fattening. 

A business mostly for the large operator, as it requires extensive acreage, much capital, a shrewd 
business head, and several years to establish. 

The western contrast, cattle and sheep. A cattleman or a sheepman has no 
trouble in making up his mind as to which of these two kinds of stock raising he 
prefers to follow. 



50 FARM MANAGEMENT 

beet roots to the factory and harvesting the rice grain for food. In the same way the 
use of alfalfa plantings as a companion industry is very apparent. As pasture or hay 
it is required in great acreage for the cattle, horse, sheep, hog, and dairy industries. 
Grain, too, is necessary in large quantities. The hog industry fits in well with the 
dairies to consume the skim-milk and, with the abattoir, to utilize what would otherwise 
be wasted. On the other hand, the alfalfa and cattle industry can be successfully 
carried on without reference to the dairy business. Hogs with alfalfa and grain can 
be successfully raised without skim-milk and dairy products. Rice, peanuts, and sugar 
beets, where soil and cUmatic conditions are right, are profitable crops in themselves. 

Comparison of General Farming and Specialized Farming. — Both the 
specialized and general types of farms have advantages and disadvan- 
tages. For purposes of consideration, they may be briefly listed as: 

Advantages of General Farming. — Mixed farming permits: 

(a) Better use of equipment. Several crops, dove-tailing one within 
the other, will permit a more profitable use of labor, work stock, and 
implements. 

(6) Better utilization of crops. Live stock in connection with crops 
permits greater returns from the crops. 

(c) More money-producing factors. There are more sources of income. 
Market fluctuations are not as important. 

{d) Better farming practices as : 

1. Crop rotation. 

2. Maintenance of productivity. 

3. Clean tillage.- 

4. Storage of moisture. 

5. Reduction of loss from pests. 

(e) Better use of labor. Steady employment brings about retention 
of better men. Good housing can be furnished if used steadily. 

(/) Better use of by-products. Certain industries naturally go 
together to economic advantage, and thus permit proper utilization of 
by-products. 

{g) Returns are usually quicker and more regular. 

Advantages of Specialized Farming.— 

(a) A start is usually possible with less capital. 

(b) The products of specialized farming are more easily marketed, 
particularly in a community where specialization is carried to a high 
degree. 

(c) The work is liable to less neglect, for it is not so confining nor 
exacting. 

(d) Better equipping. The farmer who grows 50 acres of potatoes 
can afford to employ the best potato growing machinery; the farmer 
who grows 5 acres must do without the expensive implements, or employ 
them at a loss because the proportion of fixed charges incident to owner- 
ship, which must be borne by each acre, is so great that it will exceed 
the saving effected in using the machinery. 



SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 51 

(e) Less land is required. 

(/) Less equipment is required. 

(g) Less labor is needed. 

(h) More specialization and hence more expertness is possible in 
producing and caring for the given product. 

(i) There is less chance for undetected leaks. 

Comparison of General and Specialized Farming. — The advantages 
when lined up against the disadvantages of diversification, as now advo- 
cated, show that the diversified type of farming generally offers more 
economical use of equipment, a better utilization of crops in that some 
can be fed to live stock, by-products in less danger of being wasted, 
safety in the increased number of money producing factors, and lastly, 
and most important, the chance for better farming methods to increase 
the crop producing power of the land by the use of crop rotation, incorpora- 
tion of green manure crops, clean tillage, and elimination of pests. Mixed 
farming, as diversified farming is sometimes called, does, however, have 
some disadvantages when viewed in comparison with specialized farming. 
By specialized farming we mean those farms or ranches which obtain at 
least 50 per cent of their gross returns from one main product or industry. 
We, therefore, under this measure have specialized farms producing 
wheat or beans or sugar beets or alfalfa or poultry products or dairy 
products or beef. Western farming tends toward specialization rather 
than to diversification: in eastern farming the reverse is perhaps true. 
Advocates of specialized farming point out that a minimum of land is 
required. That is, a man who would require 40 acres of good land to 
make a family living in diversified farming, can make scs much from 20 
acres of fruit, or even from 10 acres. That 5 acres will, in many sections, 
provide a family-sized poultry plant is a proven fact. Less equipment is 
needed for specialized farming. Better facilities are available for the 
handling and marketing of the product, because the specialized industries 
tend toward community centralization. Thus the selling end is helped 
out by the incoming of buyers attracted by offerings in wholesale quan- 
tities. Usually the work on a specialized farm is not so exacting in its 
requirements. The man who is raising nothing but grain will be busy 
during 3 or 4 months of preparing his land and in putting in his crop. 
From then on, with the exception of perhaps a rolling or a harrowing, he 
will be free until harvest. Harvest, hauling off, and marketing consume 
perhaps the greater part of but 2 or 3 months. If this grain grower puts 
in all the time needed, he can be busy but 7 months out of the year. In 
the same way the fruitman who specializes in one crop finds himself with 
considerable leisure on his hands. 

Tendency Is Toward Specialized Farming. — Future studies may, to 
some extent, modify the findings of today as more investigation is given 
to farm management practices in the newer agricultural sections and to 



52 



FARM MANAGEMENT 






Fig. 20. — Citrus, Rivor>:i(l(\ California. 




f^^^- 


„^l^l 




1 «l 








:^'^., . 





Fig. 21. — Apples, Wenatchee Valley, Washington. 




Fig. 22. — Ohio apple orchard. 
The fruit business — pleasant, profitable and intensive, but requires capital, time 
to develop, detailed knowledge of horticultural practices, and attention to proper 
handling and marketing of product. 



SELECTING THE FARM BUSINESS 53 

the farms specializing in single products. Diversity, as already pointed 
out, provides an opportunity to increase productivity, to keep labor 
constantly employed, and to have a variety of products to market. Even 
so, the present tendency of working farmers is towards more specialization 
with the attending greater concentration on producing and properly 
marketing one major product, with some escape in consequence from 
year-round routine, multiplicity of duties, and scattering of effort. It 
may not be too much to believe that future findings may show that there 
is a well defined place for specialized agriculture — poultry, fruit, dairy 
products, grain, hay, beef. 

A recent modified conclusion published by the United States Depart- 
ment of Agriculture states that "Diversity of the farm business is, as a 
rule, an important factor of success in farming. A medium degree of 
diversity, sufficient to give good seasonal distribution of labor, complete 
utilization of land, and a considerable variety of sale products, is better 
than either extreme diversity or a low degree of diversity. " 

Survey Findings. — While this matter of diversification is before us 
we may well inquire into what Eastern investigations show in those 
sections where the agriculture is sufficiently old and established so that 
an equilibrium in practice has been obtained. Federal investigators 
have, by means of farm management surveys, made studies of the various 
factors affecting farm profits. Of 20 or 30 surveys made in different 
parts of the country, the results of which are now available, ranging in 
location from the cotton fields of the South, the cut-over land of Wis- 
consin, Minnesota, and Michigan, the rich corn-belt lands of Iowa, 
Indiana, and Illinois, the bluegrass region of Kentucky, the high altitudes 
of Utah with its irrigation farming, the reclaimed desert lands of Arizona, 
to surveys in Texas, New Hampshire, Oregon, Missouri, and Pennsyl- 
vania, there are two or three facts which are constantly emphasized. 
One of these is the effect of diversification upon farm incomes. The 
point is stressed time and time again, that diversification increases farm 
profits. For instance: 

Haskell, reporting a Brooks County, Georgia survey, found that the matter of 
diversity was forcibly brought to the attention of the farmers of the South by the 
decline in the price of cotton following the outbreak of the European War. His 
findings as to the effect of diversification are: farms having an average of less than two 
major industries or crops received 15 per cent less return per year than farms having 
from two to four industries represented in the farm's activities. Farms having an 
average of over four showed 16 per cent greater return than those having the average 
of two to four. 26 

A Pennsylvania survey reports its findings in dollars rather than in percentages, 
with "labor income" as the measure. Labor income is the amount of money left over 
at the end of the year, if there is any left over, to reimburse the operator for his time 
and labor. The sum is obtained, as used by farm management men, by deducting 
from the total receipts all expenses, including depreciation, interest on the investment 
at a fair rate, and the value of any labor of the family not covered under expenses. 



54 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Here, with farms averaging ninet}' acres in size, the labor income increased with 
diversification from an average of $663 for 79 farms where but one or two major indus- 
tries were being followed, to an average of $888 for 125 farms having four to five 
important enterprises.' 

A Nebraska study shows that diversification increased the labor income from $105 
for farms averaging but one to two industries to $560 for those averaging five or more. 
Some adjustment should, however, be made for increase of acreage, as the group with 
the higher income averaged 213 acres as against 137 acres for the small income pro- 
ducing areas. 

As against the trend toward specialization, Bradford Knapp, Chief, 
U.S.D.A. Office of Extension Work in the South, a keen observer of the 
influence of different factors in farming, offers seven objections to the one 
crop system: 

First. — Because the system depends upon market and crop conditions of the one 
crop alone. Failure of crop and failure of market alike bring serious disaster. 

Second. — Because it does not provide for the maintenance of productivity. 

Third. — Because it fails to provide for a sufficient live stock industry to consume 
the waste products of the farm and make its waste lands productive. 

Fourth. — Because it does not provide for a system of farm management under 
which labor, teams, and tools may be used to the fullest advantage. 

Fifth. — Because it brings return in cash but once a year instead of turning the 
money over more than once a year. 

Sixth. — Because it does not produce the necessary foods to supply the people 
upon the farm and keep them in health and strength. 

Seventh. — It limits knowledge, narrows citizenship, and does not foster home 
building, but does encourage commercial farming. 

General Farming More Exacting. — The best farm manager is he who 
is able to manage successfully a mixed farming proposition. This pro- 
vides a real test of his capabilities — organization of work and men, 
crop planning, utilization of crops, and knowledge of crop and stock 
requirements. 

General Farming for Beginners. — Diversity in farming operations is, 
moreover, a good thing for the beginner in agriculture or for the newcomer 
who may be unfamiliar with local methods. If there are several major 
activities comprising the farm business, the chances of some of them 
returning a profit is sufficient insurance over the dangers of the one crop 
or one industry method to deserve careful consideration. 

On the other hand, diversification does not help all farmers. 



CHAPTER IV 
SELECTING THE FARM 

In choosing a farm one has the following options: (1) Buying a farm 
with the intention of operating it as his entire business; (2) buying a small 
farm and renting enough additional land to meet his needs; (3) renting a 
farm either on a share or on a cash basis. 

When to Rent. — If one has only a small amount of capital and wishes 
to undertake farming as a business from which to derive one's entire 
income, he should, in nearly all cases, begin as a renter. However, if he 
wishes to buy a farm on which to live, deriving a part of his income from 
other sources, then perhaps purchasing is desirable, even though capital 
is limited. 

Again, in many cases if one is able to purchase a small farm it is pos- 
sible to develop this as a basis of operations and rent additional land in 
the neighborhood. This is not an altogether desirable method of opera- 
tion, as one can never be sure of suitable lands being available. It is an 
expedient, however, that enables one to operate a much larger business 
than he could otherwise with the amount of capital he has, and at the 
same time have a home which he can call his own. 

Selecting the Right Land. — The basic essentials are selection of the 
right land for the given operator, with his given limitations and qualifi- 
cations, and acquisition of this land at the right price. The "colonies" 
of the west are full of sad misfits as between the farmer, his land, and 
its price. Quite apart from the men who should never have turned to 
farming under any consideration, because of mental or physical unfitness, 
the observer finds numberless cases of natural grain or stock land forced 
into fruit or beans or alfalfa, and of land best suited to fruit required to 
produce hops or cotton The extremes may be too large or too small; 
20 acres is not enough for diversified farming on most colonies, 40 acres 
is almost never sufficient for sole grain farming, while on the other hand 
100 acres in fruit may prove unwieldy, or a square mile of grain too much 
for the capital or working equipment available. 

Prices Sometimes Too High. — Land at too high a price is common. 
Its purchase price may be far out of proportion to its income-producing 
power, or the fault may be in excessively high yearly installments. Some 
land is cheaper at an initial cost of S300 if payments may be extended over 
a 20-year period than the same land at $200 if the full sum must be 
liquidated in 5 years. 

55 



56 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Some colonies have spent too much in developing and equipping. 
Concrete lined canals, concrete power poles, high-cost grading and level- 
ing, expensive fences and buildings, have in a number of subdivisions 
run to too great a per-acre figure. Land worth, with improvements, 
$100, cannot instantly be put on the market at $150 merely on the 
strength of unusual equipment. 

Overhead in subdivision has in many instances made the price top- 
heavy. Overhead as used here means interest, legal expenses, and selling 
expenses, including advertising and profit. Land bought wholesale at 
$200 an acre — its market value — and retailed at $600, or even at $300 
with no improvements other than promises and surveying, can impose a 
burden too heavy for the actual settler. Stony land at $700 to be planted 
to citrus fruit which will not come in for 8 years, the land itself being incap- 
able of intercropping, will not pay living and operating costs, to say 
nothing of meeting terms of $100 per year and interest at 8 per cent 
on deferred payments. 

Choice of Farm a Personal Matter. — The choice of a farm as to cli- 
mate and kind of farming to be followed, is largely, as we have already 
shown, a personal matter. One may prefer the kind of farming that is 
carried on in a northern state, another may like the climate of a southern 
state. Again, a man may have personal reasons for taking up dairy farm- 
ing, or fruit farming, or some other type. 

Turning to Established Sections. — If one has a preference for a 
particular type of farming, it is a general proposition that he should go 
where that type is well developed, since such development in itself is 
proof that conditions for the business are generally favorable. Embark- 
ing on an entirely new type of farming in a region where it has not been 
before followed is an exceedingly hazardous undertaking. Sometimes 
it is successful, but the chances are that there are very good reasons 
why such a type of farming is not found in that region. One man in- 
tensely interested in a special type of farming might make a success of it 
in a comparatively unfavorable region through great care and skilled 
management, while another less experienced or less competent in the 
same type of farming would almost certainly fail. 

Finding the Farm. — In going about the selection of a farm two ways 
are open. The prospective buyer may work up a clear mental concep- 
tion of what he wants and then set out to seek it. Or he may look over 
the available sections and farms and determine what is best suited to his 
needs and pocketbook. Both ways have advantages, although there may 
be no such ideal place as that envisaged by the first plan. Probably an 
intermediate course is best — to have in mind a clear conception of what 
is wanted in the way of climate, soil, neighbors, water, etc. and still be 
willing to consider all those available. 



SELECTING THE FARM 57 

FACTORS TO CONSIDER WHEN SELECTING A FARM 

A list of items which are usually considered in choosing a farm may- 
serve as a guide. Other items will occur to those who have had buying 
experience; to the inexperienced this list may be helpful in pointing out 
what to look for. The various factors may be classed as (a) personal, 
(6) earning capacity, and (c) financial. 

In detail these cover such things as: 

Personal. — Under personal considerations, items should be listed 
affecting the comfort, health, and welfare of the operator and his family. 
These items fall into several well defined groups, as: 

Climate: pleasant or unfavorable for a part or all of the year; neces- 
sity of going away during a portion of the year; too glaring hot in summer; 
too cold in winter; degree of humidity; amount of fog; intensity and fre- 
quency of hot or cold winds; number of hot nights; frequency and 
intensity of rainfall. 

Physical conditions of community: dust, mud, swamp, sand, rocks; 
open, long, flat stretches of treeless plains; forest covered mountain 
ranges; too high or too low an altitude; too far from or too near the ocean. 

Social facilities of community: accessibility and character of schools, 
churches, libraries, theaters, stores, doctors, hospitals, banks, transporta- 
tion facilities. 

Isolation of farm: distance from neighbors; impassability of roads at 
certain seasons of the year; influx of summer visitors. 

Opportunities: for social life, hunting, fishing, automobiling, self- 
improvement and pleasure. 

Neighbors and community: nationalities of residents and settlers, 
sociability, assimilability, progressiveness. 

Healthfulness and comfort: as for example, presence of or freedom 
from malaria, mosquitoes, hay fever, rheumatism. 

Farmstead : possibility of establishing a real home ; conveniences like 
piped water, heating system, comfortable kitchen, screened porches, 
shade, opportunity to grow flowers, shrubs, lawns, fruit trees, vege- 
tables, etc. 

Drinking water: amount; character as to alkali, sulphur, etc; freedom 
from barnyard, cesspool, or other contamination; palatability. 

These are enough to show the wide scope attending such inquiry 
and something of the sort of items to be considered. 

Earning Capacity. — Items affecting personal welfare determine how 
far a community and a farm therein can meet a family's home standards. 
Items affecting the earning capacity are fully as important, since upon 
them may depend not alone the desirability of acquiring the property 
but the future ability to support both home and business. 

Of the many items affecting the earning capacity of a farm, that of 
the crop producing power of the land stands first in importance. The 



58 FARM MANAGEMENT 

yield of crops determines the amount of product that can be disposed of : 
crops — field, fruit, truck; stock — beef, sheep, hogs, horses, poultry, 
breeding stock; stock products — milk, eggs, honey, wool, manure; 
crop products — fuel, fruit cuttings, fruit buds, sirup. Therefore, careful 
weighing of the factors affecting the crop producing power is paramount. 

Physical Factors 

Such items are to be considered as climate, soil, shape or boundary 
outline, topography, water, frosts, hail, thunder storms, disease, pests, etc. 
A few of these and similar items are examined below in some detail. 

The Shape of the Farm. — The shape of the farm necessitates con- 
sideration wherever farm boundaries are irregular and follow no geomet- 
rical design. In buying a farm with a view to practicing general farming, 
shape must be reckoned with in order to determine the feasibility of divid- 
ing the land into fields of proper size, easily accessible from the farm 
buildings. 

Less attention is needed when land is sold by sections or fractions of 
sections, since the farm is then generally of rectangular shape, well 
suited to subdivision into fields and to economical handling. 

Farm Arrangement. — In choosing a farm one can seldom find the 
ideal arrangement of buildings and fields, and a farm which may be very 
desirable in many other particulars may be undesirable in this respect. 
In the eastern states the buildings and fields were laid out and arranged 
in the days when labor was comparatively cheap and there was little 
thought of saving it. At present the saving of labor is a most important 
factor, and th-e arrangement of a farm may be such that much time is 
lost because of irregularity in the shape of fields, or because important 
fields are far from the buildings. The latter fault sometimes can not be 
remedied. In the eastern states three factors have determined, more or 
less, the location of the buildings: (1) The water supply, (2) the roads, 
and (3) the area of good arable land nearby. In regions where spring 
water is generally used the buildings were invariably placed so that the 
water could be piped or carried to them. Thus water supply had a 
greater weight in determining the location of the buildings than ease of 
reaching the fields or the highway. It is not uncommon to find the best 
fields distant from the farm buildings, or to find the buildings far re- 
moved from the highway, matters that depreciate very materially the 
value of the farm. 

Again, the arrangement of the buildings themselves, as regards ease 
in doing chores or other work about them, is important. Often the 
buildings were planned for one type of farming, since discontinued, so 
that the remaining structures are no longer best suited to the particular 
kind of farming now practiced. Frequently, however, alterations can 
be made which will improve the arrangement in many respects. 



SELECTING THE FARM 59 

Topography. — By topography is meant the general lay of the land. 
The prevailing slope, its direction and rate, and the presence of ravines, 
canyons and hills, are considered under topography. 

Low or sheltered lands may be unsuited to certain fruits because of 
their tendency to late spring frosts; hillsides may be too steep for the 
economical use of implements, while loss by washing or leaching of soil 
may be serious. Certain exposures are best suited to the production 
of certain kinds of fruit. Where irrigation is to be practiced proper con- 
sideration of the topography is important, since opportunity to develop 
a water supply and to handle the irrigation of the fields is largely deter- 
mined by their topography. 

If irrigation water must be pumped, a good deal of time can be 
profitably spent in investigating the possibilities of a constant, ample 
supply from moderately deep wells. Study of contour maps, neighboring 
wells, and log books of local well borers, will go far towards settling 
irrigation questions for fairly small acreages not too far removed from 
the wells in question and having similar conditions of soil and subsoil. 

Consideration of topography is necessary to determine the possibility 
of bringing about proper draining and satisfactory disposing of waste 
water. 

Where authentic maps are not available showing the contour lines 
of any farm under consideration, one should be made and studied, to 
determine the chances of economical irrigation or drainage. 

Soil Quality. — The quality of soil on a farm is its most valuable asset. 
Upon soil quality depend to a large extent the yields of crops and the 
period during which such yields will continue. 

Much stress is laid by agricultural advisors upon how to determine 
soil quality, but my experience leads me to conclude that a correct 
knowledge of how to tell land that is rich from that which is not, or to 
know the land which is out of condition because of neglect or wrong 
handling, can be best obtained in the school of experience. The actual 
handling and observation of different soils under various conditions is 
the surest — perhaps the only — way to learn how to tell a good soil 
from a poor one, since productivity as shown by crop yields is the 
real meaning of soil quality. If one hasn't had this training it is very 
desirable to call in some one for consultation who can help to a decision. 
Use may be made of chemical and mechanical tests, and of examina- 
tion of the plants that are natural to the land. However, as a result of 
thousands of analyses of the partial soil analysis type the conclusion is 
generally held that there is no relation between such analyses and 
productivity. On the other hand, there is evidence to show that complete 
analyses do show some relation to productivity. 

Physical Properties. — Study of physical properties of the soil is 
essential, particularly where crops are to be raised under irrigation 



60 FARM MANAGEMENT 

methods. For this purpose the soil auger and the local well borer's log books 
should be consulted. Information concerning presence of hardpan, 
stiff plow pans, gravel streaks, bed rock, presence of layers of adobe or 
stiff clay, and the like, is necessary for a proper knowledge of the possi- 
bilities of any ranch. So, too, presence of brush, wild trees, rocks, alkali, 
and waste land must be taken fully into account. On waste land, study 
of soil character is important. Adobes and heavy clays cost more to 
work, are not easy to handle, and will not permit working except within 
narrow limits of moisture content. In general, however, one should 
bear in mind that soils difficult to work are more productive than those 
easily tilled. As a rule, for most crops the loamy soils are best. They 
work easily under fairly wide limits of moisture, and are commonly so 
rich that they permit of growing a wide variety of crops. The order 
of productivity is generally clay loams, silt loams, loams, clays, silts, 
fine sands, coarse sands, gravels. In color it follows in order of black, 
brown, red, yellow, gray, white. 

Healthfulness. — The farm should be in a healthful location. What 
is wholesome for one man may not be for another. Dry, intense heat 
impairs the energy of some men; cold, snowy winters are a hardship for 
others; while malaria, alkali water, strong winds, and fogs, present 
barriers to still others. 

Improvements. — Buildings, shade, fences, ditches, land leveling, 
orchards, vineyards, and similar improvements, all add to the value of 
the farm. 

The buyer, however, should be cautious to see that the character 
of the buildings is not in excess of their real value — that is, for producing 
interest on the invested capital. Money is made from the land, not from 
the buildings — the latter serve merely to economize the gains from the 
soil. 

Water Supply for Family and Live Stock. — An assured supply of good 
water for domestic and live stock purposes constitutes a very obvious neces- 
sity. The experienced farmer knows that a farm without an adequate 
supply of water is most undesirable. In buying or leasing he is likely 
to direct his attention, first of all, to the quality of the water, then to 
the question of whether the supply is dependable at all seasons of the 
year, and to the cost of obtaining. The cost of upkeep of water supply 
on a farm is often a big item. Except in regions where there is an 
abundant supply of spring water, it usually costs more per unit of 
measure on a farm than in a city. If live stock farming is carried on, 
special attention should be given to the dependability of the water 
during hot, dry months and also during the winter months. It is 
difficult to obtain water from streams or to drive cattle long distances 
during severely cold weather. Water in the various pastures sufficient 
for the live stock is always a valuable asset. 



SELECTING THE FARM 



61 



Ease and Cost of Upkeep. — Ease and cost of upkeep refers to the time, 
energy, money, and material required for the maintenance of structures, 
equipment, and work stock and of drainage, irrigation, and reclamation 
systems and facilities. 

Markets. — Markets are of such importance in determining the 
selection of a ranch that the available ones, both local and general, should 
be investigated thoroughly. Profits depend almost wholly upon the 
possibility of satisfactory marketing, especially when perishable goods are 
produced. In this relation such details demand observation as length 
of haul to marketing or shipping point, condition of roads, marketing 
facilities at terminals, demand for products, prices obtainable, and terms 
of settlement locally customary. 

Waste Lands. ^^ — Land values are directly influenced by the propor- 
tion of total area which can be made productive. If comparison be 
made of a farm of 100 acres at $200 per acre, having 95 acres in shape to 
yield available products, with another of the same acreage at $150 per 
acre, having 65 acres productive (all other features of these two farms 
being similar), the former should prove more profitable, as the pro- 
ductive land thereon costs but $210 per acre as against $230 per acre 
for the "cheaper" farm. The table below shows the cost per acre of the 
productive land on 100-acre farms costing $100 per acre, with various 
percentages of the land available for productive purposes. It is not 
always the farm that costs the least per acre that is the most economical 
to buy or operate. 



Table 8.— Relation Between Percentage of Land Available for Production 
AND Cost per Acre (Value of Land, $100 per Acre) 



Percentage of land available for 
production 


Cost per acre of available land 


100 


$100.00 


90 


111.11 


80 


125.00 


70 


142 . 86 


60 


166 . 67 


50 


200 . 00 


40 


250 . 00 


30 


333 . 33 


20 


500 . 00 


10 


1,000.00 



Productive Land. — Broadly speaking, productive farm land is that 
used for: 

Production of crops. 
Economic pasturing of animals. 



62 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Woodland yielding marketable timber or firewood, maple sugar, or 
other salable forest products. 

Nonproductive Land. — Nonproductive farm areas may be roughly 
classified as follows : 

Wasted. — Land unnecessarily taken up by farm buildings and lots. 
Land taken up by unnecessary lanes and roads. 
The part of any public road included in a farm area. 
Land occupied unnecessarily by fence rows, open ditches, headlands, 
or turning spaces bordering fields and terraces. 

Waste. — Land rendered untillable by swamps, boulders and ledges, 
ravines, steep slopes, sloughs, streams, etc. 

Woodland not yielding salable products 
Partly waste pasture land. 

All land necessarily occupied by farm buildings, fences, etc., is essen- 
tial to the development and management of the rest of the farm; hence, 
"nonproductive land" may be taken to mean only such land as is either 
left untilled by inefficient management or is not susceptible of profitable 
improvement. The land taken out of the farm total by these nonpro- 
ductive areas is in many cases a large proportion of the whole. Such 
waste or wasted areas should be carefully considered by the prospective 
buyer of a farm. 

Percentage of Improved Land in U. S. — Table 9 shows the aver- 
age percentages of improved land on farms in the states and divisions of 
the United States. The difference between improved land and produc- 
tive land should be noted in this connection, as the terms are not wholly 
synonymous. Unimproved land, such as good timber land, sugar groves, 
etc., may be productive; while improved land, such as is occupied by the 
farm buildings, fences, and roads, may produce nothing. 

There are other causes of nonproductivity, such as large areas of 
alkali, little or no rainfall, etc., but these causes affect whole regions rather 
than parts of individual farms and are not considered here. 

Effect of Highways on Acreage. — Not infrequently a part of the area 
of the public highway touching the farm is included in the total farm area. 
This is a fixed practice in certain regions. In determining the value of a 
farm, consideration should be given to the area of highways included in 
the acreage, so that the farm can be judged by its actual available area 
and not by that called for by the deed measurements. 

Permanent and Temporary Waste. — Areas found on some farms are 
permanently untillable by reason of the presence of rocky ledges, steep 
slopes, deep ravines, wide stream areas, or undrainable swamps. Per- 
manently untillable areas can be made productive by pasturage if they 
will grow enough grass to make it economy to pasture them, or they can 
sometimes be given over to the production of timber. 



SELECTING THE FARM 



63 



Table 9. — Percentage of Improved Farm Land, by Divisions and States, Census 

OF 1910 



Division and State 


Improved land 


Division and State 


Improved land 


New England: 


Per cent 


West North Central: 


Per cent 


Maine 


37.5 

28.6 


Minnesota. . . . 


71 


New Hampshire 

Vermont 


Iowa 


86 9 


35.0 
40.5 
40.2 
45.2 

67.4 


Missouri 


71.1 


Massachusetts 


North Dakota 


72.0 


Rhode Island 


South Dakota 


60 8 


Connecticut 


Nebraska 


63 1 


Middle Atlantic: 


Kansas 


68.9 


New York 


South Atlantic: 




New Jersey 


70.1 


Delaware 


68 7 


Pennsylvania 


68.2 


Maryland 


66.3 


East North Central: 




District of Columbia 


84.7 


Ohio 


79.8 


Virginia 


50.6 


Indiana 


79.5 


West Virginia . . 


55 1 


Illinois 


86.2 
67.8 
56.5 


North Carolina 


39.3 


Michigan 


South Carolina 


45.1 


Wisconsin 


Georgia 


45 6 


East South Central: 


Florida 


34.4 


Kentuckv 


64.7 


Mountain: 




Tennessee 


54.3 
46.8 


Montana 

Idaho 


26.9 


Alabama 


52.6 


Mississippi 


48.5 


Wyoming 


14.7 


West South Central : 




Colorado . . . ^ 


31.8 


Arkansas 


46.4 
50.5 


New Mexico 


13.0 


Louisiana 


Arizona 


28.1 


Oklahoma 


60.8 


Utah 


40.3 


Texas 


24.3 


Nevada '..... 

Pacific: 


27.7 






Washington 


54.4 






Oregon 


36.6 






California 


40.8 



Other areas, broken by stumps, brush, large boulders, gullies, swales, 
etc., can be reclaimed by resort to proper methods. In valuing siich 
areas the probable cost of bringing under the plow should be carefully 
compared with the market value of good arable land in the neighborhood. 

Woodland. — Woodland is ordinarily productive land, but often farm 
wood lots producing only firewood for home consumption are maintained 
under uneconomic conditions. The more valuable the land, the more 
likely this is to be the case. Where timber occupies high-priced land 
which would be tillable if cleared, it is often questionable whether it is 
economic to allow it to remain. The cost of clearing, salable value of 
timber products, interest on the investment, prospective increased farm 
value of the land when cleared, and added annual expense for firewood, 



64 FARM MANAGEMENT 

must be weighed carefully before a decision can be reached in any such 
case. 

Poor Pasture. — Land given over to use as pasture which will not 
support sufficient stock to make any reasonable return on the investment 
properly belongs in the category of nonproductive land. 

Relation of Use to Price. — It should be borne in mind that the quality 
of the production in relation to the land value is an important consideration 
in choosing a farm. For instance, what is economic pasture on land that 
is worth $10 per acre might, on land valued at $100 per acre, be decidedly 
uneconomic. This relation should be carefully studied in buying a 
farm with much pasture land. To determine whether pasture land is 
economic or not, practical data should be secured as to the number of 
acres necessary to support one head of stock and the interest on the 
value of the land in question compared with the current charge per head 
of the same kind of stock for a season's pasturage. Or the estimated 
value of the return in increased value of the stock or its products may be 
used for comparison. By this means the relative economy of pastures 
may be determined. Similar reasoning applies to all crops. 

Labor, Social, and Financial Factors 

Of almost equal weight with physical conditions as determining crop 
producing powers are the following : 

Labor. — Amount, character, availability, cost (including wages, board, 
lodging and supervision).' 

Neighbors. — The community should be a congenial one. The 
associations of country life to the man who is adapted to fit in and to 
enjoy the friendship of outdoor people constitute one of the big rewards 
of farming. And indirectly these associations may even affect the 
profitablenss of a given venture. If a newcomer, be sure the community 
is favorable to strangers and will give them a fair deal. There are sec- 
tions where newcomers find not only cold shoulders but actual hostility 
or, what is worse, trickiness, as in the case of the beginner who attempts 
to raise sheep in a cattle country hostile to sheep. Some communities 
show well defined opposition to certain nationalities and races. 

Financial. — The financial side of choosing a farm is concerned with the 
amount of money and its availability either immediately or in the future 
for the purchase of the property, after taking into account the reserving 
of necessary sums to insure eventual discharge of other obligations and 
to meet personal needs and operating requirements. The sum available 
must be determined from the standpoint of individual command of 
capital — cash, credit, and probable earnings — either immediately at 
hand or subsequently forthcoming. 

A few items will serve to illustrate the scope of the financial inquiry 
as it concerns the purchase: 



SELECTING THE FARM 65 

Amount and availability of capital as cash, local credit, loans (local, 
state, federal, personal), legacies, liquidation of life insurance policies 
(either immediately usable or susceptible of later use), terms of purchase 
(all cash or part down and balance payable in installments), interest rate 
on deferred payment. 

Possible returns : if any returns can be diverted towards meeting the 
purchase price these may well be included. Such sources as receipts from 
sale of products or payments for outside work of teams, equipment, or 
personal service, may be partly available for applying against the pur- 
chase price. 

Once the proposed plan takes shape it should be tested in accordance 
with some such outline as that given immediately below. 

FINANCIAL TEST FOR PROPOSED FARM PROPOSITION 

Briefly, a test of any proposed plan involves two steps: 

(a) The cost to establish. 

(6) The profitableness of the plan when in full running order. 

A fully defined plan of procedure must precede actual inquiry into 
the financial side. The following suggestions will provide a starting point 
and indicate something of the scope of a desirable inquiry. 

Description of the Property 

1. Work up a complete description of the farm or plan under consideration, stating 

in as definite terms as possible the acreage, soil types, water, climatic, trans- 
portation, and marketing conditions, neighbors, proposed industries to be 
followed, acreages of crops and numbers of animals to be kept, methods of 
growing and feeding, and similar data. The plan should be well rounded 
out by careful attention to crop and animal needs as well as to the desires of 
the operator. 
Profitable use may be made of U. S. D. A. "Soil Surveys," U. S. G. S. 

"Water Supply Papers" and topographical maps. 

Local descriptive matter. 

Cost to Establish 

2. List all equipment needs. 

Equipment needs cover a careful determination of land, buildings (individ- 
ually determined as to number, kind, size, and detail of construction), work 
stock, other Uve stock, trees, landscape plantings, harness, implements, 
machinery, tools, shop material, special equipment, (as dairy house, fruit 
equipment, fences, bridges, irrigating plant, ditch boxes, furniture). 

3. Determine total of all equipment costs. 

Careful calculations of the costs of all equipment listed in paragraph 2 from 
present day catalogs of supply houses, lumber concerns, Uve stock dealers, 
and similar sources. Labor costs of construction to be included. 

4. Estimate length of period which must elapse from time of taking hold until the 

business is in full runjiing order, prorating this period according to aormal 
divisions of work. 
5 



66 FARM MANAGEMENT 

5. Make up carefully prepared table of operating costs to show for each period, as per 

paragraph 3, the items of expense to be met, and the amount, less any possible 
income. If money is borrowed or interest on investment is demanded, 
compound annually at the prevailing or demanded rates. 

6. Calculate the total investment including operating costs to estabUsh. 

Testing the Business When Fully Established 

7. Determine for the business in mind the gross receipts to be obtained when the 

business is in full running order. 

Receipts should be based on inteUigent estimates of the amount of 
production possible, based on an average covering a period of years, and on 
average prices under normal circumstances for the special conditions per- 
taining to the particular farm or plan in mind. 

Specially good sources of information as to yields for a particular ranch 
are: 

Horticultural commissioners for fruit, commission men for field crops. 

Buyers. 

Packing houses and canneries. 

Warehouses. 

Farm books. 

8. Determine all operating expenses to be met. 

Calculations of operating expense should cover labor — horse and man, 
feed, sacks, twine, boxes, lumber, seed, fertilizer, water, power, fuel, oflBce 
expense, foreman's wages, taxes, insurance, replacement of stock, rent of 
extra machinery, cost of marketing, cost' of contract work {e.g., threshing 
and baling), living expenses of operator, incidentals like axle grease, minor 
repairs, etc. 

9. Compare requirements and receipts. 

A final test may now be made to find out what the business is capable 
of doing. For instance, as an investment comparable with commercial 
businesses the farm would be expected to return a sum sufficient to pay all 
operating expenses, interest at the prevaihng rate obtainable by the operator 
for the moneys invested, a sinking fund for emergencies, a fair rate to cover 
depreciation, wherever such occurs, and a just rate for supervision. 

10. If the obligations are in advance of the receipts an analysis should be made to 

determine the cause. An explanation may be found in too high an original 
land cost, too expensive building equipment, too small an acreage to meet the 
demands made upon it, too expensive or too elaborate equipment, too high a 
rate of interest demanded, too large a factor of safety in the way of a sinking 
fund, too heavy a managerial charge, too fancy feeding of the stock, too much 
expenditure on growing crops, too low a yield for the expense; or in a wrong 
choice of industry for the land involved, or in some error in judgment, 
information, or management. 

Inherent Possibilities. — In studying the earning capacity of a given 
property attention should be directed not alone to the existing output 
but to the inherent possibilities. A well-founded ability to foresee unde- 
veloped earning capacities has made many a farm fortune. The pros- 
pects of future development may cause a revision of original estimates of 
value. 



SELECTING THE FARM 67 

As illustrations of inherent possibilities note the increased value of reclaimed delta 
lands, which has risen seven-fold after levees have been built, the land cleared, and 
pumping plants installed; or the value increase in former grain lands — which when 
planted to orchard have risen four- to eight-fold; the increase in land values residting 
from high prices for farm products and the attending greater demand — from two- to 
six-fold increase; the increase in output by putting in dairy cows or hogs where no 
stock was previously handled; the increase in crop output where intelligent fertihzing, 
green manuring, crop rotation, seed selection have been initiated; the increase where 
buildings have been repaired, painted, sometimes altered and provided with a pleasing 
landscape setting. Installation of irrigation on dry farmed areas; reduction of operat- 
ing costs by substituting machine for hand labor; putting up of a creamery or drier 
the better to utilize the output; direct selling instead of through ordinary commercial 
channels; feeding of hay and grain to stock instead of selling direct; better control of 
insect, fungus, weed, and rodent troubles, all these furnish good illustrations. 

To sense such opportunities and to realize fully upon them are good 
tests of one's business judgment and ability. 

Influence of Rise in Land Prices. — Rapid rise in capital value of 
farm lands has taken place in this country during the last 20 years, 
and no one can predict with certainty the probable course of values in 
the future. The buyer of a farm, however, should look carefully into 
the history of the development of the region with a view to determin- 
ing whether present values have been brought about by speculation in 
lands or whether they are attributable to the inherent good qualities 
of the land and the proximity to markets. He should also note those 
features which might affect its value in the future, such as the possi- 
bility of new railroads, of improvement of existing highways, of the 
development of near-by markets, of increase or decrease in demand for 
the particular products produced in that region, etc. 

Elements of the Successful Farm. — In sum, to achieve success in an 
ordinary farming venture it is almost essential to have these advantages : 

1. Opportunity for a paying size or volume of business. 

2. A type of soil or kind of live stock that will yield returns that more 
than cover the cost of production. 

3. Suitable conditions, both as to natural resources and environment 
and as to markets, to permit the development of a dependable organiza- 
tion of diversified activities.'^ 

Relative Value a Personal Matter. — The relative importance of these 
various items — personal, physical, financial — is a matter for individual 
calculation. Each should, however, be carefully sized up and its impor- 
tance weighed, and then it should be either discarded or included in part 
or as a whole, according to the idea of the investigator. 

It is easy to acquire a poor farm; it is much harder to dispose of one. 
It is hard to acquire a good farm; it is very easy to dispose of one. 

When the farming plan calls for the obtaining of property by out- 
right purchase or under lease, need arises for very careful consideration 



68 FARM MANAGEMENT 

of the relative value of different factors. The relative importance 
of the different items varies, as already suggested, with the individual. 
Varying values will be ascribed to such factors as the kind of dwelling 
on the place; the heat of summer or the cold of winter; distance from 
town, schoolhouse, church, or library; nationality of the community, 
presence of shade trees. In times of agricultural prosperity the offerings 
need special scanning as the desire or need of parting with farm lands is 
at a minimum. In hard times the numerous possibilities require care 
in determining the extent of income possible. 

Test Questions. — In attempting to reach a decision concerning a given 
property, securing of correct answers to the following questions will 
aid in reaching a final conclusion. Other questions will suggest them- 
selves to the investigator. 

What annual income do I require to cover personal needs? 

How much capital — cash or credit — can I command? 

What net incomes have been derived annually from this property in the last 5 
years ? 

What ways are there for me to increase the net income? 

How much capital do I need to obtain the property and to finance the farming of it 
in all phases while taking care of personal monetary needs? 

Is this a business I want to follow? 

Does the environment satisfy as to climate, neighbors, roads, nearness to towns, 
schools, churches, and the like? 

Will the proposition fulfill my social desires? 

Have I the required experience and training to succeed with this? 

Have I the physical strength? 

Have I the courage? 

Can I successfidly obtain any additional help needed? 

(The use of the personal pronoun in the above should be changed to 
"family and me " for a married man.) 

Test questions such as these will tend to clear thinking and sound 
decisions. There are many types of farm businesses and many kinds of 
country, so that if the answers do not warrant the taking of the first 
proposition in the first locality, the search may continue until a satis- 
factory combination of test answers be obtained. A study of rain fall, 
crop producing conditions, soils, topography, equipment, etc., precedes 
interrogation of one's self. 

Size of the Farm 

In connection with earning capacity and capital needs, the size of the 
farm is vital. 

The "Minimum Efficient Unit." — The " minimum efficient unit " in 
agriculture is a farm of sufficient size and so organized as to give full 
employment at productive labor to the farm family. The farm may be 



SELECTING THE FARM 69 

any amount larger than this, provided the operator has sufficient man- 
agerial ability to make the larger business efficient, but there are very 
distinct disadvantages if the farm business is smaller than the most 
efficient unit. When such is the case the farm family does not have 
an opportunity to exert its full earning power. 

Minimum Efficient Unit Relatively Small. — The fact that the minimum 
efficient unit in farming is relatively very small as compared with most 
other industries is the most attractive feature of farming as a business. 
Because of the small size of this unit, economic independence is fairly 
easy of accomplishment, and many prefer independence with a small 
competence to dependence with a very small chance of pronounced 
success. 

Ideal Size. — The ideal size of farm is somewhat larger than the 
minimum efficient unit. It is such as to permit a high standard of living 
and the education of the farm children. 

Farms in the North Atlantic States are mostly small in area. In 
increasing the farm business on these small farms to meet the competition 
with larger farms in the West, the line of least resistance was represented 
by the development of more intensive farming rather than by extension of 
acreage, though examples of both methods of enlarging the business are 
frequently found. It requires somewhat greater ability on the part of 
the farmer to conduct an intensive business on a small area than is 
required for a more extensive business of similar magnitude on a larger 
area. Hence, a large proportion of eastern farmers each with small area 
of land at his disposal has not been as successful as might be wished 
in developing a business of suitable magnitude. There are very many 
eastern farms that are far too small for satisfactory results. 

Just the opposite condition is found in the corn belt. There magni- 
tude of business is obtained by extent of acreage, and large farms are the 
rule, small ones the exception. m 

Acreage Required to Produce Given Income. — A comparison of 
cost of production and receipts will give a rough guide as to the probable 
returns per acre, when determined from local conditions and applied 
to a given farm. Suppose one's purpose is to secure $3,000 net income 
per year. It is evident that he must have sufficient acreage of land so 
that the per acre profits for his industry will figure up to the sum desired. 

Hoiv to Determine Size of Farm to Produce a Given Income. — Under 
California conditions, the income above operating expenses for selected 
crops is as shown in the table immediately below. The acreage necessary 
to provide $3,000 above operating expenses is therefore as indicated 
in the last column. 



70 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Table 10. — Illustrating Size of Farm to Produce a Given Income above 

Operating Expense 



Crop 



Yield 



Income per acre 

above operating 

expenses 



Number of acres 

to produce S3, 000 

above operating 

expense 



Barley 

Alfalfa 

Raisin grapes . . . 

Lemon 

Peach (canning) 
Potatoes 



Good 
Good 
Good 
Good 
Best 
Good 



S 16 

36 

61 

292 

210 

167 



188 
84 
50 
11 
14 
18 



Influence of Productivity upon Income. — In making similar studies 
for a given proposition, care must be used to see that the data are appli- 
cable and the calculations correct. Otherwise disappointment may- 
follow. 

Example of Influence of Productivity upon Income. — The next table 
shows the variation in number of acres required to produce a given 
income where yields are variable. It is evident in each case that it will 
not be safe to provide land based on good yields, if only usual yields 
are possible. On the other hand, the lesser acreage of good land, if 
available, might be financed where the greater acreage of land of usual 
producing capacity could not be handled. 



Table 11. — Illustrating Influence of Productivity In Determining Acreage 
TO Provide a Given Income 



Crop 


Yield 


Income per acre 

above operating 

expenses 


Number of acres 
to produce $3 , 000 
income above oper- 
ating expenses 


Barley 

Barley 

Barley 


Usual 
Good 
Best 


$ 6 
16 
39 


500 

188 
77 






Alfalfa 


Usual 
Good 
Best 


$ 17 
36 
56 


177 


Alfalfa 

Alfalfa 


84 
54 


Lemon 

Lemon 

Lemon 


Usual 
Good 
Best 


$142 
292 

742 


21 
11 

4 







SELECTING THE FARM 



71 



Findings from Surveys Concerning Size of Farm to Provide a Given 

Labor Income 

Table 12. — Size of Farms Providing Labor Incomes of from $500 to $700 (from 

Survey Data) 



Key No.* and location 



Type of agriculture 



Labor incomes for 
farms grouped accord- 
ing to size 



Size in 
acres 



Labor 
income 



2. Utah 


Beets and fruit 


42 
73 


$589 
620 




Grain and live stock 








4. Pennsylvania 


General and dairy 


52 


550 








5. Indiana and Michigan 


Celery, onions, peppermint, stock 


18 


503 












101 to 150 


636 








9. Utah 




77 


598 








10. Montana 




96 to 125 
65 to 95 


617 






598 








12. Georgia 


General field crops as cotton, 
oats, sugar beets and corn 


over 250 






512 






40 


578 










General farming 


121 


689 










Wheat, tobacco, livestock and 


89 






539 








20. New York 


General farming and dairying. . . 


177 


635 






23. New York 




126 


568 










Corn, wheat, and other field crops 


121 to 200 


525 










240 


558 








26. Eastern Nebraska 


Stock and grain 


237 


684 




Stock and grain 


301 to 350 


551 






28. Utah 


Stock, grain, and forage crops. . . . 


70 to 99 


672 










87 
30 


721 




Dairying 


659 






64 


702 









*The key number corresponds to the same number in the list of farm 
management surveys described in Chap. 27. 



72 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Size of Farms to Provide Labor Incomes of $500 to $700. — The 

influence of the size of farms as a measure of the magnitude of the busi- 
ness indicates that there is a limit below which it is not profitable to go. 
What this limit may be is largely a personal matter since the size of nec- 
essary income to meet all needs varies with such things as nationality, 
size of family, ages of members, early environment, training, and working 
capacity. If the findings of selected surveys are grouped by acreages and 
those arbitrarily selected that show the acreage for an average labor 
income of from $500 to $700, the foregoing table is obtained. It should 
be borne in mind that the use of home grown products, house rent, etc., 
are additions to the labor income, while interest on the investment is 
available for the use of the family. The idea here is to show some- 
thing of the acreage needed to provide a given farm income, rather 
than to discuss what constitutes a figure to provide decent living 
conditions. 

Other Examples of Sizes. — McNair^^ found that for farms in Arkan- 
sas, family farms are from 28 to 38 acres, the acreage varying with 
such factors as type of farming, crop yields, soil types, and size of 
family. 

Levi Chubbuck of the United States Department of Agriculture 
(Office of Farm Management) in studying 100 citrus groves in southern 
California, found that by grouping them according to size, the majority 
ranged from 10 to 20 acres in extent, thus: 

Table 13. — Size of California Citrus Groves 



Limit, range in 


SIZII, 


Nu: 


MBER OF GHOVE8 


ACRES 








5-10 






24 


10-20 






58 


20-30 






12 


30-40 






3 


40-50 






3 



Cory^^ states that a 40-acre unit, of the usual federal irrigated 
reclamation district, intelligently cultivated, can be cared for by the 
owner and his family, while an 80-acre farm will require the services of 
at least one hired man. 

The consensus of opinion of project managers as to the desirable 
acreage for farm units on Reclamation Service projects was found to be 
as follows: 



SELECTING THE FARM 73 

Table 14. — Size of Farms Recommended for Reclamation Service Projects 



Economical acreage 



Project 




Umatilla, Ore 

Truckee-Carson, Nev... 

Milk River, Mont 

Klamath, Ore , 

Orland, Cal 

Okanogan, Wash 

Shoshone, Wyo 

Strawberry Valley, Utah 

Sunnyside, Wash 

Huntley, Mont 



From data collected in California for the Land Settlement Com- 
mission^^ the size of business needed for certain specialized industries was 
found to be: 

Table 15. — Size of Farms Recommended for Five California Specialized Types 

OF Farming 

Business Range Average 

Grain 80-640 acres 320 acres 

Fruit 10-40 acres 20 acres 

Poultry 1,500-3,000 fowls 2,500 fowls 

Dairying 10-30 cows 20 cows 

Diversified farming 10-80 acres 40 acres 

Other sizes of farms are shown in tables under "The Capital Require- 
ments of Farming" and "Farm Profits," and attention is directed to these 
for further data. 

Actual Examinations and Report 

The Actual Examination of the Farm. — The actual examination of 
any farm it is proposed to acquire is best made at two or three widely 
separated times. The first trip can be in the presence of the owner or 
agent, but subsequent trips are best taken unaccompanied in order to 
permit a careful investigation in a manner free from bias and influence. 
It is well, if possible, to watch the property through a complete season and 
see what it will do. Or it may be feasible to rent for a year with the 
privilege of bujang should the property reach expectations and come up to 
the claims made for it by the seller. 

In looking over a farm a great deal of valuable information as to 
its past behavior can be gained bj^ an examination of the books and 
records, if such contain detail sufficient to show acreages, crop yields, 
receipts and expenditures. 



74 FARM MANAGEMENT 

A vital part of the actual examination of any farm is the frequent 
use of the soil auger. 

Preparing Report. — To guard against omission of important items, to 
urge mental consideration of the various factors, and to condense and 
record the findings, a written report should be prepared covering in fullest 
detail the entire proposition. Such a report, if properly made, will 
include a list of items as suggested above with a frank statement of the 
investigator's conclusions as to climate, neighbors, isolation, crop produc- 
ing power of the land, drawbacks and good points, value of the property, 
probable future, etc. Such crystallization into written form will bring 
about a study not only of personal reaction to conditions but is sure to 
include a necessary study of soil types, rainfall and other climatic data, 
and an investigation of the more profitable businesses in the community, 
etc. 

Preparing Report Is Interesting. — Such a study, involving preparation 
of a report, will, to the sincere student, prove to be very intresting. 
In many instances it will aid in forming a judgment concerning the 
wisdom of purchasing a given property. 

Suggested Form for Report 

An outline is subjoined showing the method of rendering a business report of farm 
properties. 

1. Give a description of the property, legal, general, and descriptive, with reference 
to state, county, township, towns, railroads, distance to school, neighbors, churches, 
stores, libraries. 

2. Describe conditions on the farm as regards soils, topography, cHmate, water for 
domestic use and for irrigation, agricultural conditions at present, kinds and yields of 
crops, methods of farming, presence of alkah, weeds, disease (cholera, anthrax, blight, 
malaria). 

3. Present condition of buildings, improvements, equipment, and hve stock. 

4. Investigate the title. 

5. Determine amount banks will loan on property. 

6. Insure right of way. 

7. Show possibiUties of the farm as to new crops, new industries, milk, poultry, 
hogs, increase in present production, reclamation, drainage. 

8. Investigate local labor conditions, especially during peak loads, and occurrence 
of adverse conditions such as smelter smoke, danger of rains during fruit harvest, late 
frosts and damaging winds. 

9. Make a recommendation concerning price. 

10. State best plan of operating farm to justify investment. 

11. List sources of information. 

Score Cards. — Score cards are sometimes offered for use in gauging 
farms, and are of value in focusing the attention upon salient features. 
The relative standing of the different items varies, however, with the 
individual concerned. The card is valuable only in giving a list of the 



SELECTING THE FARM 75 

items or points to be taken into consideration. It is not practicable to 
assign relative weights to any particular items. For instance, a farm 
might score perfect in every respect except water supply, but if no water 
was available it would be useless. Hence assigning to each item a per- 
centage or weight might lead to erroneous conclusions. A better method 
seems to be to examine carefully all the features of two or more farms and 
then view the matter in a broad, common-sense way. 

Blank Form for Use in Selecting a Farm^^ 

Location of farm _ 

Owner 

Address 

Distance to shipping station ; to trading center 

Condition of roads ; in winter ; in spring 

Distance to schools and churches ; to nearest neighbor 

Is telephone available? R. F. D. ? 

Electric current for lighting ; for power 

Total area of farm ; acres in crops ; acres that can be used 

for crops ; acres in pasture ; acres in woods ; acres in 

waste land ; in roads, buildings, lots, swamps, lakes, etc ; acres 

in stump or brush land Kind of timber ; ease in getting 

out timber or wood 

Topograph}^ as regards economy of cultivation ; irrigation ; 

danger from erosion or sliding ; flooding 

Natural fertility as evidenced by kind of forest growth and native vegetation 

Present condition of fertility as evidenced by growth of crops or weeds 

Physical condition of the soil ; adaptability to legumes ; 

adaptabihty to all kinds of crops 

Natural drainage Artificial drainage Depth of soil 

Kind of surface soil Kind of subsoil. 

Water supply: Source ; quantity in dry summer months or during 

winter months ; cost of upkeep ; supply in pastures 

Buildings as suited to kind of farming ; adaptability to another 

type of farming ; cost of upkeep ; arrangement for 

economy of work ; desirability of dwelling as a home ; 

condition of fences ; kind as regards cost of upkeep ; 

farm highways ; shape of fields ; nearness to farmstead 

Kind of orchards ; condition 

Adequacy of trees for home use 

Climate: As to growing season ; days available 

for farm work ; healthfulness 

Neighborhood: Character of people ; available labor 

supply 

Possibility of increase or decrease in value of land 

Possibility of selUng farm 

Possibility of renting farm 

Desirability of farm as a strictly business investment 

Desirability of farm as a home or place to retire 

Adaptability of farm to changing economic conditions necessitating change of type .... 



76 FARM MANAGEMENT 



Adaptability of farm for enlargement of business 

Adaptability of farm for diversification or improved organization of the business. 



Adaptability of the farm for high yields of crops and desirability for live stock produc- 
tion 

Sureness of market for major crops grown 

History of farm as regards management of land with respect to keeping up fertility .... 

History of region as to development and speculation in lands as affecting present 
price 

Number of other well-developed farms in immediate vicinity which are success- 
ful How long have they been farmed? 

What are some of the operators' difficulties? 

How soon can the farm be made a going concern ? 

A blank showing questions of importance in describing farm properties, 
as developed by the Extension Service of the Maryland College of 
Agriculture, is of interest in considering how to judge farm properties. 

Farm Description Blank 

County Election District 

Farm of acres, located miles from P. O., 

(R. F. D. No. . . . ) miles from steamboat wharf, on river; 

miles from railway station, on R. R. line; 

miles from auto bus or truck fine; miles from electric .car 

line; miles from school; miles from 

churches 

(Give denominations) 

Nature of highways from farm to above places 

(macadam, gravel, unimproved) 

Nearest city or town population Nearest market 

or markets (local and wholesale) General surface 

features of land altitude 

(level, hilly, rough) 

Character of soil Drainage 

(gravely, sandy, loam, clay) (good, acres that need drainage) 

acres: Tillable used as meadow 

in timber , nature of timber 

(kind and size of trees) 

in fruit , Varieties and number of each 

What crops do best on this land? 

Fences, kind and condition 

House, size and condition (give full description) 

Barns and outbuildings 

(give full list with statement of size and condition of each) 

Water facilities 

(running water, wells, cisterns, streams or rivers) 

Water frontage By whom occupied (owner or tenant) 

Reasons for selling 



SELECTING THE FARM 77 

Lowest sale price Terms 

Will owner rent with option to buy? ; on what plan? 

Estimate of capital needed to make improvements on buildings 

Soil improvements Fences 

Give any other useful information, and if possible a map of the farm on the back of 
this sheet 

Valuing Farm Lands 

Valuing Farm Lands for Purchase. — With the increasing demand for 
farm lands and resultant rise in land values, the inexperienced prospective 
buyer is often at a loss to distinguish between real and inflated values. 

In many sections brisk demand accompanied by speculation has 
resulted in unwarranted prices and the unloading of considerable property 
at prices beyond all reason. 

Factors Determining Land Values. — In attempting to determine 
what one is justified in paying for a farm or agricultural land, greater 
ease in reaching a decision will result if the value of the place in mind is 
considered, first, upon the basis of what may be expected in the way of 
profit — in other words, the producing power of the land; second, upon 
the basis of its worth as a home; and third, potential future increase in 
value. 

All these factors may contribute to the real value of the land. There 
are lands so situated that from the producing standpoint they are 
extremely valuable, yet because of climatic or social conditions they offer 
small attractions as a home. Such lands should be valued solely upon 
their producting power. 

There are other lands, the producing value of which is but moderate, 
yet because of good roads, churches, schools, pleasant neighbors and 
other evidences of civilization, together with a congenial climate, scenic 
advantages, or easy accessibility, they command prices far above those 
justified by the profits which can be secured for them. 

Lands, for instance, in many parts of Florida, CaUfornia, and similar regions, are 
sought out and acquired with special reference to their desirability as home sites. 
A combination of agreeable climate, pleasant neighbors, good roads, schools, churches, 
towns, and other evidences of civilization, creates a value in excess of the strict pro- 
ducing power of the land in the way of profit. 

On the other hand, lands in many sections of the southwest, some of the deltas, 
the more remote cattle ranges, and similar situations, perhaps offer little in the way of 
a home to most people but much as sources of profitable returns. 

Land Values and Returns. — Since land values determine investment 
and investment in turn demands satisfactory returns, it is well to recog- 
nize the fact that a man operating in a section valuable for both its home 
and investment features, can not expect as high returns as the man 
operating in a section where values are based solely upon the producing 
power of the land. 



78 FARM MANAGEMENT 

In attempting to reach a correct decision one should separate these 
two factors and determine what one is justified or wilHng to pay for each 
of the two items. 

Estimating Home Value of Farm Lands. — Any figure designed to 
cover the home aspect must of necessity be the result of careful individual 
determination. A certain place may offer an environment most desirable 
for a man with a family, yet not at all to the liking of a single man. One 
man may wish to settle near certain neighbors or within easy access of 
his business, or to acquire a special landscape. To consummate his 
wishes he is willing to pay well for the place which will fulfill his require- 
ments. There is no general rule in this regard. Care, however, should 
be exercised not to invest beyond one's means since the farm land can not 
justly be expected to make returns upon capital expended solely for the 
home aspect. 

Estimating Productive Value of Farm Lands. — The value of the lands 
based upon their producing ability is relatively easier to determine than 
the home value. 

From the business standpoint the test of the real value of farm prop- 
erty is the net return which can be secured upon the investment. There- 
fore, in order to arrive at the value of any given property, it is necessary 
to reverse the usual order of procedure and work back until the sum is 
determined which is equivalent to interest on the investment. In the 
case of any farm, determine the gross returns which can be expected 
under the plan of procedure which it is expected will be followed. This 
sum should be carefully determined, as should all the other details enter- 
ing in, to insure an accurate decision. From the sum representing gross 
receipts is to come first, the outlay for operating expense. This includes 
outlay for labor — horse and man, including the labor of the farmer him- 
self — material, sacks, seed, etc. — taxes, insurance, and such other items 
as enter into the carrying on of the project. Secondly, from the gross 
receipts should come sums to offset depreciation of buildings, implements, 
and stock, a just sum for management, and a sinking fund for emergencies. 

When these sums, together with such other items as naturally enter 
into the handling of a farm are deducted from the gross recepits, the 
remainder will be equivalent to interest on money invested, the rate to 
be determined by the individual, i.e., one may expect to get 6 or even 
10, or perhaps 15 per cent interest on the investment in farming 
properties. This, then, will give the total producing value of the property. 

Examples of Determination of Productive Land Values. — For instance, apples and 
barley may be used as concrete examples to illustrate the method. Let us say that for 
two given farms, careful determinations indicate that these figures will cover the 
various items enumerated above. The reasoning will then result in land values per 
acre as indicated below. 



SELECTING THE FARM 79 

Apples Barley 

Labor and material $ 94 $ 6 . 50 

Management 18 2 . 50 

Depreciation 3 .50 

Taxes and insurance 4 1 . 25 

Interest on operating capital 1 .60 

Sinking fund 5 .50 

Total cost per acre $125 $11 .85 

Yield of crop 175 packed boxes 12 sacks 

Value of crop $155 $13 . 20 

Less expense 125 11 . 85 

Sum equivalent to 6 per cent interest 

returns on land $ 30 $ 1 . 35 



Or land is worth per acre with all im- 
provements and equipment $500 $22 50 

When Returns Are Insufficient to Meet Charges. — If, on the other hand, 
the returns from the sale of the crops are not sufficient, after covering 
the various items outlined above, to leave anything for interest on the 
land value, it is evident that the land is in the wrong crop, that the acre- 
age is too small, that the product does not command the proper price on 
the market, or that the land is not being made to produce as it should. 
If, on thorough investigation one can assure oneself that these factors 
can be overcome, one will have justification for purchase, because the 
value of the land is not in its present producing power but rather its pos- 
sible producing power viewed from the standpoint of crop requirements, 
costs of production, and ability to market. Thus this barley land may be 
worth only $22.50 per acre for grain, but if it will produce 175 boxes of 
apples per acre, worth $155 per acre, and leave a margin of $30 to cover 
interest, it has an inherent and intrinsic value of $500, on the basis of 6 
per cent, less whatever it costs to bring the orchard to bearing. 

Potential Values of Farm Lands. — An increase in market values of 
land will usually occur when lands are obtained at a price less than their 
producing value. Such lands will doubtless ultimately reach their true 
value and give the operator a just additional profit, if he sells. Lands 
so situated that they may become especially valuable property for homes 
carry with them an individual valuation, and any increase from this source 
must be based upon individual judgment. 

Good and Bad Lands. — Good and bad lands are terms which are 
relative in their application, since they apply to the crops it is intended 
to grow. Thus lands poor for wheat or barley may be excellent for 
pears; land poor for potatoes may be excellent for grains. Or, on the 



80 FARM MANAGEMENT 

other hand, lands worth $500 for peaches may not be worth $20 for grain, 
or land worth $40 for grain may be worth $150 for alfalfa. Thus land 
is good when used for the purpose for which it is suited and bad when 
used for crops not adapted to it. 

Buying and Selling Farm Lands 

Buying and Selling Farm Lands. — Sale of farm lands, when the terms 
of sale have been agreed upon, involves an abstract of title or certificate 
of record, and a deed. When total purchase price is not paid down, 
then will also be attached a mortgage — realty or chattel or both, or a 
contract setting forth the selling agreement. A few words of explana- 
tion of these may be of help to those unacquainted with the conditions 
surrounding land sales. 

Abstract of Title. — An abstract of title consists of copies of records of 
all patents, sales, deeds, attachments, trust deeds, court actions, legal 
decisions, in fact all proceedings which may affect the title of the prop- 
erty under consideration, which are on file in municipal, county, and 
state offices. 

Great variation occurs in abstracts of title since there is much differ- 
ence in frequency in transfer of ownership, in litigation, in use as security 
for loans, in lapses of time since issuance of first patents. Multiplicity 
of documents is occasioned whenever additional lands are subsequently 
acquired, or whenever sales of a portion are made from the original 
acquisition. 

Example of Abstract of Title. — Because of the wide range of terms, access by the 
student to a few original abstracts is very desirable. The example given below is 
selected merely to show something of the scope of an abstract. This property (a 
California ranch) is comparatively new — patent being issued in 1871 under the terms 
of the "Swamp and Overflow" Act — and consists of 1,088 acres of an original 1,600 
acres. The abstract records a history of development, starting with overflow land 
of an alluvial nature and continuing through clearing, improving and planting crops 
until 1918 — when the last record appears. 

The scope covered in the legal and financial activities surrounding this property 
covers 389 pages of legal folio paper, embracing recorded legal documents as follows, 
(numbers in parenthesis indicate number of times appearing) : 

Statement describing property covered by abstract (6). 

Abstract Company certification as to correctness of abstract memoranda (7). 

Map (1). 

Letters patent from State (under "Swamp and Overflow" Act) (6). 

Deeds (recording sales) (44). 

Sheriff's certificate of sale on foreclosure (3). 

Mortgages (18). 

Assignment of mortgage (4). 

Attachments (3). 

Trust deed (to secure loans) (6). 

Trust deed (to provide a railway right of way) (1). 



SELECTING THE FARM 81 

Deed of reconveyance and release of mortgage (after loans protected by a trust 
deed are fully paid) (6). 

Petition for letters of administration, court orders, details, and outcome (1). 

Bond for a deed (1). 

Notice of foreclosure of mortgage (3). 

Certificate of redemption (to set aside suit to recover sum advanced under mort- 
gage, debt fully paid) (1). 

Complaint and action to foreclosure, summons, stipulations, answers, decree (2). 

Court order of sale (1). 

Sheriff's deed (on foreclosure) (2). 

Agreement to continue lease (1). 

Tax statements (3). 

Power of attorney (2). 

Certificate of purchase (2). 

Action to quiet title, abstract of proceedings, decree (2). 

Petition for a reclamation district (1). 

Action condemning riparian rights (1). 

Judgments for debts (3). 

Tax sales (2). 

Release of judgment (1). 

Articles of incorporation (3). 

Action to collect reclamation district assessments (2). 

Action to determine validity of reclamation district assessments (4). 

Commissioner's certificates of sale after foreclosure (1). 

Decree of partial distribution (estate) (1). 

Decree of final distribution (estate) (1). 

Sale for non-payment of state taxes (1). 

Contract to sell (under stipulated terms) (1). 

Transfer of title in contract to sell (1). 

Lease (1). 

Assignment of contract to purchase (2). 

Assignment of contract to sell (1). 

Assignment of lease contract (2). 

Action arising from disagreement over cutting wood and clearing land, details, 
outcome (1). 

Rights of way deeded to county (2). 

Quitclaim deed (1). 

Crop mortgage (1). 

Release of assignment (1). 

Abstracts of title have a human interest background not shown by a 
bare summary such as that given above. Records such as these are 
replete with evidences of bickerings, feuds, misunderstandings, incrimina- 
tions and reincriminations, so that when read in their entirety these dusty 
records become shining mirrors of human attempts and achievements 
in the march of agriculture to the present day status. The mortgage 
records show that during a period of 50 years the acreage represented 
by this property has figured in loans totaling close to $200,000. 

There are persons, firms, or corporations which make it their business 
to abstract titles and who are called abstractors of titles, or searchers 

6 



82 FARM MANAGEMENT 

of records. On smaller transactions it is not customary to insist upon 
an abstract of title, but to secure in place of it a certificate of title, 
which is in effect a statement by the person, firm, or corporation that it 
has examined the title and certifies that it is vahd, or if the title is not 
clear states in what way the title is clouded. Even if the searcher of 
records is not a public officer, he constitutes at present the accepted 
means of securing advice concerning land titles. 

Certificate of Title. — A certificate of title is a guarantee of title and 
covers a statement by an incorporated abstract company, reciting that 
after a careful examination of county records it certifies the title is 
unclouded and acceptable. 

Example of Certificate of Title. — A common form of abstract follows : 

THE HANFORD ABSTRACT COMPANY INCORPORATED 
E. E. Bush, President Hanford, California. 



Unlimited Certificate 



Made at request of 

After a careful examination of the Official Records of the County of Kings, State 
of California, and of the Records of the County of Tulare, State of California, prior 
to the organization of the said County of Kings (said Kings County formerly being a 
part of said Tulare County), except those hereinafter mentioned, in relation to the 
title of that certain tract of land hereinafter described. 



The Hanford Abstract Company 

(A corporation. Its principal place of business being in the City of Hanford, 
County of Kings, State of California.) 



hereby certifies that the title to said land, appears of record in. 



This certificate does not include an examination of, or a report on: 

1. Rights reserved in United States Patents, or in the Certification of Indemnity 
Land selections, existing roads, ditches, canals, levees, water locations, mining claims, 
crops, or matters relating thereto. 

2. Records of or relating to Irrigation, Drainage, Reclamation, Levee, Protection, 
Storm Water, Boulevard, Fire and Sanitary Districts, if the property discribed herein 
lies within the boundaries of any such districts. 



SELECTING THE FARM 83 

3. Municipal taxes and assessments (except those collectable in the County Tax 
Collector's office) and the effect and operation of the municipal laws, ordinances and 
regulations, proceedings for street, sewer and other municipal improvements, and for 
opening, widening and other changes in streets or alleys, if the property described 
herein lies within the boundaries of any incorporated city. 

4. Proceedings for street lighting, sewer, shade trees and sidewalk improve- 
ments, and for opening, widening and other changes in streets or alleys in any City, 
unless the amount of assessments therefor has become fixed and shown as a lien by the 
recording of same in the public office designated by law. 

5. Instruments, trusts, defects, liens, easements, incumbrances and right or claims 
of parties in possession of all or any portion of said property, not shown by any public 
record of the County of Kings, State of California, and errors and omissions in surveys. 

6. The validity or legality of tax sales, street assessments, attachments, leases, 
easements, declarations of homestead and money judgements if any are mentioned as 
incumbrances in this Certificate. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The Hanford Abstract Company has caused this 
Certificate to be signed by its Manager, and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed 

this 

day of 19. . . . , at o'clock M. 

THE HANFORD ABSTRACT COMPANY 

By Manager, 

Certificate No 

Copy Book No Page 

Examiner 

Deed. — A deed is a document conveying all rights of possession to a 
purchaser for consideration. 

Example of a Deed. — An example of a deed indicates its character. 

THIS INDENTURE, made this 13th day of December, 1920, between GUS- 
TAVE BRENNER of the City and County of San Francisco, State of California, the 
party of the first part, and FRANK F. BEZERA of the County of Kings, State of 
California, the party of the second part. 

WITNESSETH 

That the said party of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of Five 
Dollars, ($5.00) lawful money of the United States of America, to him in hand paid by 
the party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does by 
these presents grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm unto the said party of the 
second part, and to his heirs and assigns forever, all that certain lot, piece or parcel of 
land situate, lying and being in the County of Kings, State of California, and more 
particularly described as follows; to- wit: 

COMMENCING at a point on the center line of Section 12, Township 18 South, 
Range 20 East M.D.B. & M. which center line runs North and South and is the 
Easterly boundary line of the West half of said Section and the Westerly boundary 
of the East half of said Section, distant thereon 30 feet Northerly from the Southerly 
line of said Section; running thence Northerly and along said center line of said Sec- 
tion 1,072.5 feet; thence at a right angle Westerly 264 feet; thence at a right angle 
Southerly 1,072.5 feet and thence at a right angle Easterly 264 feet to the point of 
commencement, containing 6.5 acres. 



84 FARM MANAGEMENT 

TOGETHER with all and singular the tenements, hereditaments, and appurte- 
nances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and rever- 
sions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof. 

TO HAVE AND TO HOLD all and singular the said premises, together with the 
appurtenances, unto the said party of the second part, his heirs and assigns forever. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the party of the first part has hereunto set his hand 
and seal the day and year first above written. 



Signed, sealed and delivered 
in the presence of, 

I, JULIA BRENNER, wife of said Gustave Brenner do hereby consent to the 
foregoing convenance and do hereby grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm unto the 
grantee therein named, Frank F. Bezera, any interest which I may have in and to the 
real property therein described. 

DATED: This day of 1921. 



Selling Contracts. — These contracts are of various kinds, specific 
needs determining the phraseology, length, type, and scope of the written 
(sontract. These agreements are usually executed in duplicate. 



CHAPTER V 
ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 

Organizing the business of a farm means first the selection of enter- 
prises that will fit together into a satisfactory plan of management, and, 
second, the working out of the details incident to putting the plan into 
operation. Ordinarily this comes to a system that will permit the maxi- 
mum use of power, labor, and capital within the limits of the owner's 
available resources; that will require a minimum of equipment with the 
maximum use of that equipment; and that will so distribute the labor 
during the seasons that the farmer and his available help, both man and 
beast, will be profitably occupied at all times without being too much 
crowded at any one time. It also involves the determination of the char- 
acter and extent of the equipment required for the satisfactory conduct of 
the business, and the installation of this equipment. 

Advantages of a Farm Plan. — Several advantages are gained from a 
careful working out of the farm plan in advance. To do so means testing 
possible income, necessary expense, probable profit, and ability to meet 
deferred financial obligations from the returns, and from these deduc- 
tions drawing as to the feasibility of the plan itself and the desirability 
of acquiring the farm in question. If the business is a going concern, 
and not merely bare land, the continuance of its present plan of 
operation will of course be given fair consideration. A new plan is 
not necessarily a better plan, but obviously it is desirable to have, if 
possible, a number of tentative plans for any farm; to compare is to insure 
selection of the best. 

Drawing up a plan of work compels, furthermore, a close study of 
needs, and should therefore lead to avoidance of emergencies. A likely 
result, for example, is more careful attention to the matter of required 
reserves of hay, grains and other feeds, to the reserving of necessary seed, 
and to providing all supplies and materials sufficiently in advance of 
actual use to prevent delay. In the calendar of operations, which forms 
an important part in any plan of work, estimates of necessary equipment, 
motive power — tractors, trucks or work stock — and extra help can be 
computed and arrangements made to insure their presence when needed. 
Times of slack work, or overcrowded periods, will likewise show up. 

Therefore, both in preliminary studies and in actual practice, the 
plan of work constitutes an important part of management. 

85 



86 FARM MANAGEMENT 

It parallels the building of a house, in that it provides a basic plan 
and furnishes the foundation upon which the farming operations are 
to rest. 

Determining the Principal Objective. — In drawing up working plans 
for a given enterprise it is of prime importance to determine the principal 
immediate objective. This may be present pressing need for gaining 
additional capital; it may be, rather, foundation-laying for greatest 
ultimate returns; perhaps it will be maintenance or increase of soil 
productivity. 

If for instance productivity is the prime consideration, a given field 
known to offer greater returns from barley than from beans, yet needing 
the soil betterment obtainable from legumes properly handled, may 
be devoted for a season or more to beans. In this case the ultimate 
increase of yields is assumed to be worth more in the long run than the 
surplus of returns derivable from the continued planting of barley. 
Sometimes a combination is desired, as for instance a plan to improve 
the soil while providing immediate returns for use in meeting operating 
expenses. An example is found in the running of a dairy for the sake 
of both the manure — to be used in bettering the soil quality, and the 
monthly cream check — to assist in financing the enterprise. 

Necessity of Knowing Local Practices and Conditions. — The general 
program in operating a given property is largely determined by the 
individual aims of the operator, based upon the soil, water, climate, 
markets, transportation, and financial possibilities. Familiarity with 
types of farming in the community, both those in actual use and those 
possible of use, should precede organization of the farm business, since 
variations in practice are so great that individual study must rule. 

In southern Michigan, for instance, corn, oats, wheat, and hay are the principal 
. farm crops. Alfalfa is a special crop. Live-stock products are more important, how- 
ever, than crop products. General farming with a reasonable amount of live stock is 
the prevalent type. In southern Ohio, the general or mixed type of farming is 
prevalent, about one-half of the land being used for pasture for beef cattle and fine- 
wooled sheep, and one-fourth in growing feed crops for live stock kept on these farms. 

In the Blue Grass region of Virginia, live stock on the large farms and tobacco on 
the smaller farms are the two prevalent types of agriculture; while corn, wheat, and 
hemp occupy less important positions in the cropping program. Sumter County, 
Georgia, is strictly a cotton growing section, more than one-half of the land under 
cultivation being devoted to that crop, and nearlj^ 90 per cent of all farm receipts 
coming from that source. In large areas of Oregon, wheat and oats are grown to 
the exclusion of almost all other field crops under a practice by which one-fourth to 
one-third of the land is summer-fallowed annually. 

The most important crop of the Provo irrigated area of Utah is the sugar beet, 
though apples and peaches more recently introduced are growing in importance. 
With the exception of a few small fruit and poultry farms, alfalfa is the basis of 
farming in the irrigated valleys of Southern Arizona. With ample alfalfa efforts to 
farm profitably have resulted in the production of hay, rental of pasture, and alfalfa 
seed, dairy products, and fattened beef cattle. 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 



87 



California's interest in farming runs more generally to the production of fruit, 
both citrus and deciduous; although large areas are devoted to cereals, especially 
barley, while the production of truck crops — in a wholesale way — asparagus, potatoes, 
onions, celery, etc. is important. Beans, sugar beets, hops, and hemp are factors in 
California agriculture, while alfalfa is grown extensively for the purpose of producing 
hay, seed, and pasturage for cattle, sheep, and hogs. 

Tabular Presentation of Sectional Differences in Types of Farming. — 

Differences in types of agriculture as practiced in various sections, taken 
from surveys conducted at widely separated points, are exhibited in 
statistical detail in the following tables. As illustrating the sort of 
thing the planmaker must consider, they will repay careful study. 



Georgia. 

Table 16. — Agriculture of Sumter County, Georgia, as Shown by the Sources 

OF Farm Receipts ^* 



Source of income 



50 acres and 
less (25 
farms) 



151 to 250 

acres (31 

farms) 



Over 450 

acres (11 

farms) 



Cotton 

Cotton seed 

Total cotton 

Corn 

Small grains 

Hay 

Cane sirup 

Sweet potatoes 

Fruit and nuts 

Miscellaneous crops 

Total crops 

Increase feed and supplies 

Cattle 

Horses and mules 

Hogs 

Poultry 

Bees . . 

Total stock 

Miscellaneous sources. . . . 



69.1 
7.1 



9.9 
2.0 



75.0 
10.1 



5.4 

1.2 



78.4 
12.5 



76.2 


85.1 


90.9 


1.5 


3.7 


3.7 


0.5 


1.0 


1.5 


0.9 


1.0 


1.0 


1.4 


1.1 


0.1 


0.5 


(a) 


0.2 


0.1 


(a) 




0.7 


0.2 


0.5 


81.8 


92.1 


97.9 


6.3 


1.3 


0.3 


3.4 


0.4 


(a) 


0.8 


0.1 




3.4 


4.7 


0.3 


2.2 


0.2 


(a) 


0.1 







0.3 
1.5 



(a) Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent. 



88 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Michigan. — 

Table 17. — Agriculture of Lenawee County, Michigan, as Shown by the 
Sources of Farm Receipts (Average of 300 Owners) ^^ 



Source of income 



Per cent 
of total 
receipts 



Source of income 



Per cent 
of total 
receipts 



Dairy products 

Dairy cattle 

Beef cattle and feeding 

steers 

Horses 

Colts 

Sheep 

Feeding sheep 

Hogs 

Poultry 

Total live stock 



31.8 
5.4 

0.7 
0.3 
2.0 
3.6 
1.9 
15.4 
6.9 

68.0 



Corn 

Potatoes 

Wheat 

Oats 

Barley 

Other grain 

Hay 

Seeds 

Truck 

Fruit 

Miscellaneous (a) 

Feed and supplies (h) 

Total crop and miscell- 
aneous ! . . 



1.3 

0.6 
7.9 
3.8 
0.7 
0.1 
3.6 
0.2 
0.4 
0.9 
3.5 
9.0 

32.0 



(a) Labor, lumber or wood sold, etc. 
(6) Increased inventory. 



Utah.— 

Table 18. — Agriculture of Provo Area, Utah, as Shown by the Sources of 

Farm Receipts ^o 



Source of receipts 
(averages) 


First group, 35 small 
farms 


Second group, 30 fruit 
and beet farms 


Per farm 


Per cent 


Per farm 


Per cent 


Corn 

Potatoes 

Wheat 


$ 44 
10 

4 

28 

188 

23 

85 

88 

145 

2 


7 
2 

1 
4 
30 
4 
14 
14 
24 


$ 7 

39 

39 

39 

43 

125 

746 

84 

48 

60 

86 

9 


1 
3 
3 


Oats 


3 


Barley 


3 


Hay 


9 


Beets 


56 


Truck crops 

Apples 

Peaches 

Other fruit 


6 

4 
5 
6 


Miscellaneous crops 


1 


Total 


617 


100 


1,325 


100 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 



89 



Corn Belt. — 



Table 19. — Agriculture of Representative Areas of Indiana, Illinois 
AND Iowa as Shown by the Sources of Farm Receipts " 



Sources of income 


Operated by owners 
(273 farms) 


Operated by tenants 
(247 farms) 




Both landlord and tenant 




Receipts 


Per centage 
of total 


Receipts 


Percentage 
of total 


Crops 


$ 858 

1,715 

143 

331 

26 

3 


27.9 

55.8 

4.6 

10.8 

0.8 

0.1 


$1,333 

778 

111 

459 

20 

2 


49 3 


Stock 


28 8 


Stock products 


4 1 


Increased inventory 

Labor 


17.0 
7 


Miscellaneous 


0.1 


Average or total 


$3,076 


100.0 


$2,703 


100.0 



Local Practice a Guide in Organizing the Work. — In general, the type 
of agriculture practiced in the section will rule in planning the farm 
business. Grain farming in a grain belt is conducted in line with exist- 
ing agencies to harvest, store, and sell. Districts specializing in fruit 
growing, bring about available packing houses, harvest help, box fac- 
tories, storing and shipping facilities, etc. Therefore, the starting point 
in planning is to study present farming methods and uses prevaihng in 
the section where the land is located. 

The farm enterprises in any well-developed agricultural region are 
mainly those which the experience of farmers has shown to be profitable. 
In the process of selecting such enterprises the soil and climate are 
fundamental factors. Additional limiting factors may be a profitable 
market or the availability of the right kind of labor. Still another factor, 
not so evident as either of these, is the way the various enterprises fit 
in with each other so as to interfere as little as possible. Each crop not 
only has its peculiar method of cultivation, but also its own peculiar 
seasons for the various operations required. Not only must a certain 
amount of labor be given, but this labor usually must be applied within 
definite seasons. Hence the organization of these enterprises must take 
into account economy in the distribution of labor. Even though an 
enterprise like tobacco, for instance, may yield a very large profit per 
acre, the amount that can be handled profitably on a given farm is 
limited not only by the amount of good tobacco soil, but by such a relation 
of the tobacco crop to other enterprises as will bring about the most 
advantageous distribution of available labor. 



90 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Farm Management Fundamentals. — Various farm management 
surveys have convincingly supported present day farm management 
theory in developing the following fundamentals truths which will 
help to decisions in the process of formulating plans for organizing a 
given business. 

Diversity. — Diversity of the farm business is, as a rule, an important 
factor of success in farming. A medium degree of diversity, sufficient 
to give good seasonal distribution of labor, complete utilization of land, 
and a considerable variety of sale products, is better than either extreme 
diversity or a low degree of diversity. 

Expense of Operating Small Farms. — On small farms the expense of 
operation is. much greater per unit of product than on large farms of 
similar type. 

Local Practice Best. — When conditions affecting the agriculture of a 
region have remained stable for a considerable period, local agricultural 
practice tends to become approximately what it should be for best results, 
provided the practice which gives the best immediate returns does not 
unfavorably affect soil fertility. When conditions change, even slightly^ 
and the change persists, local farm practice begins to change and ulti- 
mately adapts itself to the new conditions. 

Type of Farming Limited. — The type of farming followed in any given 
case must be adapted to local soil, climatic, and labor conditions, and es- 
pecially to local conditions with reference to markets and market facili- 
ties, as well as to the business conditions existing on the individual farm. 

Size of Business. — Success in farming, measured in terms of the family 
income and standard of living, is directly proportional to the magnitude 
of the farm business, although the percentage of profits on the farm invest- 
ment is, within wide limits, independent of the magnitude of business. 

Optimum Crop Yields. — In the matter of yield of crops per acre, the 
point of diminishing returns is reached on a considerable proportion of 
farms. Profits increase as yields increase until the yields are considerably 
above the average for the locality, but beyond ttiis increased yields are 
obtained at the expense of farm profits. 

Optimum Dairy Cow Production. — In quantity of product per dairy 
cow, the point of diminishing returns is not reached in ordinary farm 
practice. Hence, on dairy farms, quantity of product per cow is, on the 
average, a more important factor of success in farming than is yield of 
crops per acre. 

Increasing Crop Yields. — It is both easier and more profitable to 
increase low acre yields than high ones, and a small product per cow than 
a large one. In other words, profits can be increased most easily by 
attention to the weakest points in a system of farming. The more vital 
the weakness, the greater the increase in profits that can be made. 

Prorating Acreage. — With a given type of farming, under given condi- 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 91 

tions, there is a certain way of dividing acreage among the several 
enterprises of the farm which is more profitable than any other way; that 
is, there is a most profitable acreage for each crop. Similarly there is a 
most profitable proportion of income from each source. If the acreage 
of any crop or the proportion of income from any enterprise be greater 
or less than this optimum, the profits of the farm as a whole are lowered 
thereby. 

Specialization. — Future studies may modify to some extent the 
findings of today as more information is available, especially from the 
farm management practices in the newer agricultural sections, and as to the 
farms specializing in single products. Diversity as now recommended 
provides an opportunity to increase productivity, to keep labor constantly 
employed, and to have a variety of products to market. In many 
localities, however, the present tendency is for farmers to work towards 
more specialization — with the attending greater concentrations on pro- 
ducing and properly marketing one major product with some escape from 
year round routine, multiplicity of duties, and scattering of effort. That 
is to say, one who considers most of the present-day specialized farming 
to be adventitous or experimental, must agree that in time this sort of 
farming will appear to be in numerous instances soundly based on the 
economic as well as on the technical side. 

Plan Depends on Outstanding Individual Need. — The plan to be 
placed in operation will depend not only on the principal objectives, as 
already indicated, but quite as much — sometimes even more — on the 
more pressing individual need of the operator or of the farm, or upon the 
needs of both in the form of compromise or fusion. Sometimes the ulti- 
mate plan is of necessity suspended for the time being to permit the 
substitution of a temporary plan required to meet immediate needs. 
Sometimes small parts of the broad program are set aside in favor of 
minor changes, to meet unforeseen or temporary contingencies. 

The objects sought in the adopted plan or plans — whether it be the 
broad scheme under which the property is finally to be handled, or the 
one designed to meet temporary needs — must be worked out carefully 
in each instance, for necessity varies with individuals, localities, farms, and 
producing and distributing conditions. The plans may be designed to 
put into operation at once the scheme which it is expected will result in 
the greatest possible profit; or, planning may be needed to provide im- 
mediate capital for operating expense, or to increase or maintain the crop 
producing power of the land, or to provide fruits, vegetables, or other 
farm products for home consumption, or to reorganize going concerns 
for greater profits or greater ease in handling. 

And we cannot too strongly insist on the early recognition both of 
the need to exercise study and care in formulating an effective and 
economical plan of work along the lines most important to be developed, 



92 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



in accordance with the conditions under which the work is to be — or is 
being — conducted; and of the fact that such a plan will materially assist in 
bringing the business under the operation of farm management principles. 

Planning to F*rovide Immediate Capital. — A way to provide immediate 
capital is frequently the most pressing consideration in planning the 
farm work. To men starting out with limited means it is often the vital 
issue. The actual securing of capital quickly is, however, a special 
subject. Most farm managers and practicing farmers are more con- 
cerned with the formation of those plans, which in being carried out, will 
make for the largest possible profit from operations extending over a 
long term of years, rather than for a provision by which the farm itself 
can be drawn upon as a means of providing the major part of its working 
capital. 

An example will indicate the method of procedure to find out what 
crops will bring the most money. 

Table 20. — Selecting the Most Profitable Crop for Quick Returns 



Crop 



Yield 



Market value 



Value per 
acre at 
market 



Order of greatest 

value per acre 

based on market 

value 



Pink beans. . . 
Barley hay. . . 

Barley 

Milo 

Wheat 

Volunteer hay 
Alfalfa hay. . . 



1,000 1b. 
2 tons 
1,000 1b. 
1,500 1b. 
900 lb. 
IJ^ tons 
1 ton 



$ 5 . 00 per cwt. 
14 . 00 per ton 

2.00 per cwt. 

2.50 per cwt. 

3. 50 per cwt. 
12 . 00 per ton 
16. 00 per ton 



$50 . 00 
28.00 
20.00 
37.50 
31.50 
18.00 
16.00 



Crop 



Cost to 
produce 
per acre 



Profit per 

acre after 

deducting 

cost to 

produce 



Order of 
greatest 

profit 

based on 

profits at 

farm 



Cost to 
market 
per acre 



Net profit 



Final order 
of profit- 
ableness 



Pink beans. . . 
Barley hay. . . 

Barley 

Milo 

Wheat 

Volunteer hay 
Alfalfa hay. . . 



$32 . 00 

12.70 

9.50 

21.34 

9.42 

9.00 

20.00* 



$18.00 
15.30 
10.50 
16.16 
22.08 
9.00 
Loss4 . 00 



$ 2 


70 


11 


60 


1 


70 


2 


16 


2 


43 


8 


10 


5 


40 



$15.30 

3.70 

8.80 

14.00 

19.65 

.90 

Loss 9 . 40 



* Returns are based on results of the first year only, as immediate cash returns are 
desired. 

Summed up, the table indicates that for this particular 100 acres with seven 
crops available, it is possible to make nearly S2,000 from wheat as against an addi- 
tional cash outlay of $940 for the alfalfa. 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 93 

Example of Selecting the Most Profitable Crop for Quick Returns. — One hundred 
acres of land is available and it is decided to plant the crop which will produce the 
quickest cash returns for the year's work. Probable yields, cost, and probable market 
returns are known. The line of procedure will follow three definite steps. These are 
determination of: 

1. Market value per acre. 

2. Profit less cost to produce. 

3. Net profit after deducting cost of production and selling expense. 

The accompanying table shows the outcome. Under cost of production are 
included items of: Plowing, Harrowing, Seed, Seeding, Cutting, Raking, Mowing, 
Bahng, Sacks, Twine, Etc. 

Under selling expenses are included : 

Hauling to shipping plant, 
Freight to market, 
Selling commission. 

Necessity for Complete Work. — Note that there is no relationship 
between the value per acre, the cost to produce, and the cost to market. 
It is therefore necessary to take all these into account in order to decide 
with assurance what can be done. 

Applied to Live Stock Farming. — The same line of reasoning may be 
applied with equal force and value to the determination of the relative 
profitableness of different live stock enterprises, or to the comparison 
of possible crop and live stock phases. 

Planning for Ultimate Profit. — Planning for greatest ultimate profit 
is the primary object in mind from the business standpoint, when one is 
establishing any enterprise for an investment or a lifework. It means 
that the operator must plan his work to result in returns commensurate 
with those demanded of the usual business investment, or at least with 
his idea of what he may reasonably expect of his business. 

Producing or Purchasing. — As a general rule, in planning the organiza- 
tion of the business, both at the start and from year to year thereafter, 
the things should be grown which can be more cheaply produced than pur- 
chased, and, conversely, the things should be bought which can be 
landed more cheaply at the farm than they can be produced upon it. 
This applies to hay, grain, seed, manure, poultry, eggs, milk, cream, 
fruit, vegetables, etc. 

No man on a relatively small ranch, needing his time for supervision or actual 
labor, should attempt to build implements or wagons and expect to put out a cheaper 
or better wagon than the firms which make a specialty of this kind of work. Yet 
there are ranchers who have paid wheelwrights to build wagons at a cost easily 50 per 
cent over the price in the open market. The size of a certain ranch necessitated the 
employing of a wheelwright, and the superintendent thought that by occupying the 
man's attention in this way during dull times he was actually making money. The 
building of wagons, however, as a subsequent investigation showed, encroached upon 
time which could have been employed to better advantage in a number of different 
ways. 



94 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Another man — a superintendent of 25,000 acres — boasted that he had made all of 
his gang plows, 17 in number, in his own shop. While no books were available, a 
careful estimate showed that the tools stood him more in actual dollars and cents than 
the price of bringing reputable implements from a good house. 

The same line of thought should be applied to the planning of the 
farm work, especially in regard to side issues not vital to the primary 
object for which the farm is being run. 

For instance, land in the heart of the citrus belt is worth so much for oranges that 
the raising of grain or hay would not give the returns which should be forthcoming. 
If 20 acres of good orange land is worth in the unimproved state $300 an acre, it is clear 
judgment indicates that it should go into the best producing crop as soon as possible, 
since such crops will return 8 per cent on $1,000 with product at $1.75 per box, while 
grain yielding 2,300 lb. would return less than 8 per cent on only $200, if sold at 
$1.10. 

Choosing the Profitable Enterprise. — Farm management surveys 
provide material showing the influence of crop or live stock choice upon 
profits. 

Texas Illustration of Relative Profitableness of Different Farm Enter- 
prise. — An example from Texas" will illustrate the choice of crops based 
on the relative profitableness of crops which can be successfully grown 
in the community: 

Table 21. — Relative Profitableness of Farm Enterprises as Shown by Average 
Figures, from Farm Management Survey Records, Taken During 
1916 IN Anderson, Atascosa, Bexar, Brazos, Collin, 
Coryell, Comanche, Dallas, Harris, Falls, Tarr- 
ant Kerr and Red River Counties, Texas 



Enterprise 



No. of 
farms re- 
porting 



Total 
No. of 
acres 



Returns 

per acre 

for man 

labor 



Man hr. 
of labor 
per acre 



Returns 
per hr. 

for man 
labor, 
cents 



Sorghum for silage 

Small grain (oats and wheat) 

Sorghum for hay. .• 

Sweet potatoes 

Peanuts 

Cotton 

Grain sorghum 

Corn 

Barley 

Millet 

Blackeyed peas 

Poultry 

Hogs 

Cattle 



6 

67 

58 

28 

36 

75 

24 

104 

7 

7 

20 



80 

2,444 

337 

53 

564 

2,882 

196 

2,200 

36 

45 

240 



$25.92 


32 


7.80 


13 


17.40 


29M 


44.24 


79 


18.24 


38 


22.00 


48 


11.88 


27 


8.40 


20 


3.60 


9 


1.90 


10 


6.37 


49 



81 
60 
59 
56 
48 
46 
44 
42 
40 
18 
13 
46 
34 
29 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 95 

Ohio Illustration of Relative Profitableness of Different Farm Enter- 
prises. — A study in 1909^^ of 23 Ohio farms showed the layout to be 
divided into: 

Table 22. — Relative Profitableness of Farm Enterprises — Ohio 

Acreage Feb cent of total 

General farm use 5.51 acres 3 . 32 

Household use 2. 04 acres 1 . 23 

Laborers use . 08 acres . 05 

Stock 46.50 acres 85.71 

Crops 85.71 acres 51.68 

Orchard 1 . 95 acres 1 . 18 

Woodland 34.09 acres 14.53 

Value of bare land $45 . 96 Per acre 

Iowa Illustration of Relative Profitableness of Different Farm Enter- 
prises. — Munger^"* shows the effects upon labor income of the proportion 
of total acres in crop and pasture of farms in northeastern Iowa. He 
points out that farmers having less than 20 per cent of the land in pasture 
received labor incomes of over S400, but with an increase in pasture 
the labor incomes rapidly declined. Farmers with over 40 per cent in 
pasture not only had no labor incomes but lacked SI 20 of making 5 per 
cent interest on their investment. An average labor income of — $41 
resulted where less than 60 per cent of the farm was in crops, as compared 
with a labor income of $480 where more than 80 per cent was devoted 
to crops. 

A difference in labor income of more than $800 was found in comparing 
a group of farms containing 20 per cent and less of the farm in corn, and a 
group with over 50 per cent in corn; and this in spite of the fact that farms 
in the last group averaged 165 acres as compared with 245 in the first. 

West Virginia Illustration of Relative Profitableness of Different Farm 
Enterprises. — Dadisman and Sarle^^ from a study of 520 records taken for 
2 years on 260 farms in southeastern West Virginia, report the effect of 
business upon income. Of these farms 239 were operated by owners 
and 21 by tenants. 

Of owner-operated farms, 98 were beef farms or those on which 40 
per cent or more of the total income came from beef cattle, 121 were 
general farms, their receipts being derived from both live stock and crops; 
and 20 were dairy farms deriving 40 per cent or more of their total I'eceipts 
from the dairy. Averaging the 2 years, the beef farms made the largest 
income, $1,590, or nearly $100 more than 5 per cent interest on the 
investment, and a labor income of $94. The general farms made a 
family income of $532, or a little less than 5 per cent interest on the 
investment for the 2 years, and a labor income of — $60. The 20 dairy 
farms show a family income of $1,268, which was 5 per cent interest on 
the investment and fair wages in addition, and a labor income of $366. 



96 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Different Plans Bring Different Results. — In the working out of a given 
farm by different men different results will appear. 

Example of How Different Plans Bring Different Results. — In illus- 
tration note the outcome in planning the utilization of 97 acres of land 
valued at $500 per acre. No restriction was made as to capital. The 
requirements were to get the most out of the land in its total area, and 
to determine profit and loss. The results of four men follow: 



Labor income 



53,200 (average of 2-5 years) 
5,028 (average of 9 years) 
3,398 
9,282 



Industry 
Dairy 

Hogs, dairy, fruit 
Dairy 
Fruit 



The investment varied from $55,000 to $81,000. 

Planning to Provide a Diversity of Enterprise. — Under present finding 
and recommendations, if other things are equal, the plan should provide 
for diversity of enterprise. Examples of the effect of diversity upon 
incomes, taken from farm management surveys, are presented below: 

Example of Effect of Diversity upon Incomes, Pennsylvania. — A Penn- 
sylvania study ^ shows: 

Table 23. — Relation of Diversity to Income, Pennsylvania (Owners)' 



Diversity index 


Number of Average 
farms labor income 


Average size 
of farms 


Less than 1 to 2.9 


79 
107 
125 

67 

378 


$663 

718 
888 
866 

789 


83 


3 to 3.9 


90 


4 to 4.9 


94 


5 and over 


90 


Total and averages 


90 



Example of Effect of Diversity on Cost of Labor and Farm Profits, Georgia. 
A study made in the south indicates: 

Table 24. — Relation of Diversity to Cost of Work-stock Labor and to Farm 
Profits (Brooks County, Georgia) ^b 



Diversity index 


No. of 
farms 


Average 

diversity 

index 


Acres of 
crop 

land per 
farm 


Cost of 
mule Crop 
labor index 

per day 


Index 

of 
earnings 


Less than 2 


27 
54 
25 


1.5 
3.0 
4.7 


89 
147 
194 


$1.20 
1.04 
0.98 


0.98 
1.02 
1.00 


85 


2 to 3.9 


100 


4 and over 


116 






All farms 


106 


3.0 


145 


$1.07 


1.00 


106 









ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 



97 



Example of Relation of Diversity to Labor Income and Other Factors, 
Nebraska. — An example from a western state, Nebraska, shows: 

Table 25. — Relation of Diversity to Labor Income and Other Factors" 





Average 


Number 


Labor 


Animal 


Crop 


Crop 


Average 


Range of 
diversity 


diversity 
index 


of 
farms 


income 
per 


units 
per 


acres 
per 


acres 
per 


area of 
farms 








farm 


man 


man 


horse 


(in acres) 


1.0-1.9 


1.3 


8 


$105 


6.9 


72 


18.0 


137 


2.0-2.9 


2.4 


36 


355 


9.5 


94 


24.0 


184 


3.0-3.9 


3.4 


85 


358 


11.9 


97 


24.6 


218 


4.0-4.9 


4.4 


47 


426 


12.4 


104 


26.7 


227 


5 and above 


5.5 


19 


560 


13.1 


122 


27.0 


213 



Unprofitable Diversification. — It is possible for diversification to be 
carried to an unprofitable extreme. Beyond a not, however, as yet well- 
defined limit, further diversification may be at the expense of skill and 
attention to the details of the major sources of income. But it does not 
appear that any of these groups of farmers have gone beyond that limit. 

Planning to Provide Days of Productive Labor. — Labor income in- 
creases with the number of productive days' work per farm. A work unit 
is the average amount of work done in a day by the average workman . 
Some men do much less and some do much more than this. Some men 
also have their work so organized that a given amount of effort accom- 
plishes more work than the average. 

Within limits, the labor income of the farmer increases with the size 
of his farm, and, especially on small farms, with the diversity of the enter- 
prises followed; that is, large farms are more profitable than small ones, 
and farms having several kinds of products to sell are more profitable 
than farms having only a few kinds to sell. The reason for both of these 
facts is probably the same, i.e., that a large farm even when devoted to a 
few of the leading farm enterprises and a small farm having a large num- 
ber of enterprises will ordinarily give the farmer opportunity to find 
profitable employment for a greater portion of the year than a small farm 
with only a few enterprises. In both cases, also, the farmer has the 
opportunity to employ more labor, of both man and beast, as well as more 
capital. 

Organizing the work will go far to provide for ample productive labor, 
as illustrated below from farm management survey findings. 

Example of Relation of Productive Work Units to Profits and Other 
Factors, Pennsylvania. — This is shown in the results of a Pennsylvania 
survey : 



98 



FARM MANAGEMENT. 



Table 26. — ^Relation op Productive Work Units Per Man to Profits and 
Other Factors in Farming on 378 Owner Farms, Chester County, Pa.'' 



Productive work 
units per man 



Average 
per man 



Num- 
ber 
farms 





1 
Produc- 


Average 


tive 


size. 


work 


acres 


units per 




horse 



Labor 
income 



Labor in- 
come of 
operator per 
day of pro- 
ductive 
labor 



Less than 100. 
100 to 149. . . . 
150 to 199. . . . 
200 to 249. . . . 
250 to 299. . . . 
300 to 399. . . . 
400 and over* 

Average. . . . 



83 
126 
176 
222 
272 
336 
448 

201 



22 

62 

114 

102 

49 

23 

6 

378 



58 


38.5 


72 


45.2 


90 


55.8 


96 


59.1 


108 


62.7 


107 


63.2 


101 


66.7 


90 


78.3 



I 181 

366 

625 

959 

1,147 

1,535 

1,833^ 



$2.18 
2.90 
3.55 
4.32 
4.22 
4.57 
4.09 

$3.93 



*One farmer out of the six met with serious loss for which he was not responsible, 
thus causing a minus labor income of $49. The average labor income of the other 
five was $2,209, with an average wage of $4.93 per work unit. 



Example of Relation of Productive Man Work Units to Labor Incomes, 
Missouri. — ^A Missouri study shows: 

Table 27. — Relation Between Productive Man Work Units and Labor Incomes 

(Mo.) 28 



Productive 


man work units per man 
per year 


Labor incomes 




Owner 


Part owner 


Tenant 


100 or less 


$ 27 
176 
334 
303 
460 
511 
752 


$ 165 
225 
383 
407 
492 
672 
1,178 


$168 


101-125 


326 


126-150 


325 


151-175 


496 


176-200 


571 


201-225 


825 


Over 225 


962 







ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 



99 



Example of Relation of Labor Income to Man Labor, Nebraska. — The 
results of a Nebraska study gives: 

Table 28. — Relation Between Labor Income and Efficiency of Man Labor 

(Neb.)" 



Area of farms (in acres) 


Average 

labor income 

per farm 


Average 

number of 

men per 

farm 


Average 
number of 
crop acres 

per man 


Productive 

animal units 

per man 


40-100 

101-150 


$122 
355 
322 
684 
445 
324 

$385 


1.11 
1.14 
1.38 
1.90 
2.14 
2.61 

1.54 


58.5 
90.0 
101.9 
101.2 
114.0 
113.5 


6.7 
9.5 


151-200. . . '. 


10.9 


201-250 


13.5 


251-320 


11.9 


Over 320 


16.6 






Average (195 farms) 


98.5 


11.4 



Planning to Reduce Labor Requirements. — During times of scarcity 
of and high prices for labor, plans to reduce labor requirements are often 
of interest. Such reduction must of course be accompanied by a study 
of the possible effect upon farm incomes. Some idea of the labor require- 
ments of crops is obtainable: 

1. By listing the operations required in commercial crop production. 

2. By determining the amount of man and horse labor required for 
each operation. 

3. By reducing the data thus obtained to man days and horse days 
per acre, and 

4. By taking the yield into consideration. 



100 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Example of Selecting Crops of Low Labor Requirements. - 
em crops recently studied^^ summarize as follows: 



-Certain west- 



Table 29. — ^Labor Requirements of Crops (California) 



Crop 



Average 
yield 
(tons) 



Man-hours 
per acre 



Horse- 
hours per 
acre 



Man-hours 
per ton 



Horse- 
hours per 
ton 



Alfalfa 

Barley 

Cannery peas. , 
Cantaloupes. . . 
Corn (Milo)... 
Cotton (seed). 

Currants 

Early potatoes 

Grain hay 

Green corn. . . . 

Rhubarb 

Strawberries. . 
String beans. . 
Sugar beets. . . 
Sweet peas. . . . 

Tomatoes 

Wheat 



8.3 
1.3 
2.6 
6.5 
1.3 
0.5 
1.7 
3.0 
2.0 
2.1 
4.1 
5.3 
7.5 

13.5 
0.3 

11.3 
1.1 



49.0 

11.2 

204.0 

188.0 

28.0 

90.0 

250.0 

119.0 

9.3 

102.0 

190.0 

1542.0 

815.0 

83.0 

170.0 

149.0 

11.7 



56 
47 
51 
119 
41 
51 
15 
38 
31 
50 
21 
11 
85 
64 
66 
52 
53 



5.8 

8.4 

78.0 

29.0 

25.0 

175.0 

151.0 

40.0 

5.3 

52.0 

47.0 

308 . 

110.0 

6.2 

685.0 

13.2 

11.2 



7 
36 
17 
18 
36 
99 

9 
13 
15 
25 

5 

2 
12 

5 
258 

5 
49 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 



101 



Data from miscellaneous publications are presented in round numbers : 

Table 30. — Labor Requirements of Crops — Utah, Georgia, Missouri, West 

Virginia, Pennsylvania 



Locality 



Crop 



Labor requirements per 


acre 


Man-days 


Horse-days 


40.0 


9.2 


61.0 


11.0 


34.0 


12.0 


33.0 


13.0 


22.0 


7.0 


24.0 


12.0 


2.5 


2.9 


9.5 


11.0 


3.2 


3.4 


31.0 


10.0 


37.0 


17.0 


13.0 


13.0 


38.0 


15.0 


16.0 


16.0 


14.0 


50.0 


3.3 


3.1 


• 23.0 


2.9 


1.3 


1.9 


1.9 


2.1 


6.7 


6.8 


5.4 


5.0 


10.3 


5.0 


26.2 


14.4 


2.5 


4.0 


1.5 


2.5 


2.0 


2.5 


6.0 


4.0 


12.0 


10.0 


0.8 


1.9 


5.7 


4.3 


2.3 


3.4 


0.8 


0.7 


10.2 


8.2 


38.0 


5.3 


6.9 


6.2 


6.5 


7.2 


9.7 


9.3 


1.6 


2.6 


2.0 


3.9 


6.1 


8.7 



Utah« 



Georgia^ 



Missouri's 



W. Virginia^ ^ 



Pennsylvania^ 



Strawberries 

Raspberries 

Peaches 

Prunes 

Pears 

Apples 

Alfalfa 

Canning peas 

Small grain 

Snap beans 

Tomatoes 

Potatoes 

Onions 

Sugar beets 

Cotton (upland) 

Corn 

Peanuts 

Oats 

Cowpea hay 

Sorghum silage 

Watermelons 

Sweet potatoes 

Sugar cane 

Corn, husked 

Wheat, oats and rye 

Cowpeas 

Potatoes 

Tomatoes 

Oat hay 

Corn 

Wheat 

Hay 

Potatoes 

Tobacco 

Corn, grain 

Corn silage 

Potatoes 

Oats 

Wheat 

Alfalfa 



102 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Detailed Labor Requirements of Cotton and Strawberries. — To illustrate 
the method of finding a basis for computing the figures in Tables 29 and 
30 two detailed individual cases are given: 

Table 31. — Detailed Labor Requirements of Producing Cotton (California) 
Yield % bale = 1,200 lb. seed cotton 



Operations 



Acres 
per day 
per man 



Acres 
per day 
per horse 



Man- 
hours 
per acre 



Horse- 
hours 
per acre 



Plow, 6-7 in., 8 mules, 2-14-in-. bottoms 

Irrigating once, 3-ft. head 

Double disc, 4 horses 

Drag, 8 horses 

List, 3 horses 

Smooth, 2 horses 

Plant (2 horses, 2 rows, 36 in. apart) 

Irrigating (2 times between Apr. 15 and 

May 15) 

Disc-cultivate (away from, "bar off, " 2 horses) 

Chop 

Cultivate up to — "warp" 

Irrigate 3 times ' 

Cultivate 3 times (alternate to Aug. 15) 

Irrigate 3 more times 

Hoe twice 

Pick — man pick 150-250 lb. per day — >^ acre. . 

Totals 



5.0 
10.0 
10.0 
10.0 

5.0 
10.0 
12.0 

5.0 

10.0 

1.0 

10.0 

4.0 

10.0 

4.0 

0.5 

0.17 



0.62 



6.0 

5.0 
5.0 
5.0 



2.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
2.0 
1.0 
0.8 

2.0 

1.0 

10.0 

1.0 

2.5 

1.0 

2.5 

20.0 

60.0 

108.8 



16.0 

4.0 
8.0 
6.0 
2.0 
1.6 



2.0 
2.0 
2.0 

43.6 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 



103 



Table 32. — Detailed Labor Requirements of Producing Strawberries 

(California) 

(Flat Land, Irrigated) 

Yield 200 chests per acre 



First year operations 



Acres 


Acres 


Man- 


per day 


per day 


hours 


per man 


per horse 


per acre 


4.0 


0.8 


2.5 


8.0 


2.0 


1.2 


4.0 


4.0 


2.5 


0.07 




140.0 


0.05 




200.0 


0.04 




250.0 


0.5 




20.0 


2.0 




5.0 


0.05 




200.0 






821.2 


0.08 




125.0 


0.1 




100.0 


0.02 




500.0 


0.4 




25.0 


0.01 




1,000.0 



Horse- 
hours 
per acre 



Plow (8 in. deep, 4-6 horse gang; 

Harrow (2 times, 4 horses) 

Ridging (1 horse and plow) 

Smoothing by hand 

Planting out 

Hoe and weed twice 

Cultivate (twice by hand) 

Irrigate 5 times 

Bedding in runners 

Total first year 

Operations other years: 

Cutting off tops once 

Cultivate (by hand 3 times) 

Hoe and weed (3 times) 

Irrigate (once a week, man does 10 acres per 

day) 

Picking (2-3 chests per day) 



12.5 
5.0 
2.5 



20.0 



Since plants bear 3 crops, multiply 

. by 

Add man-hours, first year 
Total man-hours, four years 
Average man-hours, per year 

Average yields 

First year — 25 chests 
Second year — 300 chests 
Third year — 350 chests 
Fourth year — 125 chests 
4 )800 
200 



1,750 

3^ 

5,250 

820 

6,070 

1,520 

Hence 1,520 man-hours and 5 horse-hours 
per year produce 1 acre or 200 chests of 
strawberries. 



104 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Variation in Labor Needs. — An example of the range in labor needs 
for the same crops grown under different conditions of soil, topography, 
yield, and equipment is illustrated in the following tables: 

Table 33. — Variation in Labor Needs of Barley (California) 



Case No. 


Crop 


Yield tons 


Man-hours per 
acre 


Horse-hours per 
acre 


1 


Barley 


1.4 


14.0 


42 


2 


Barley 


1.4 


9.0 


59 


3 


Barley 


1.6 


22.0 


72 


4 


Barley 


1.4 


7.5 


46 . 


5 


Barley 


1.4 


7.0 


24 


6 


Barley 


1.2 


18.0 


27 


7 


Barley 


1.1 


5.2 


67 


8 


Barley 


1.0 


7.0 


43 



Planning to Produce Family and Farm Supplies. — In the chapter, 
"Farm Profits," is shown the value of home, family food, and fuel. 
These contribute in a substantial way to the farm income. Their 
inclusion in the farm program should be carefully considered. 

Planning to Produce Vegetables. — The vegetable garden, in itself, offers 
an interesting example of planning the work to obtain a steady supply 
of vegetables and at the same time meet crop growing requirements. 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 
Goodrich writes for the South:^'^ 



105 



Table 34. — Planting Plan for Vegetable Garden in the Middle Cotton Belt 

(For a farm family of five adults or their equivalent. Size of plot, 200 ft. long by 

144 ft. wide, rows 200 ft. long) 





Row 

space, 

feet 






Final plantings 


Row 


Earliest planting 
period 


First crops 






No. 












Period 


Crop 


1 


4 


Feb. 15-Mar. 15 


150 ft. asparagus, 50 ft. herbs 






2 


3 


Jan. 1-Feb. 28 


Cabbage, lettuce between cab- 
bages 


Aug. 1-15 


Sweet corn 


3 


3 


Feb. 1-28 


Early white potatoes 


do 


do 


4 


3 


do 


do 


do 


do 


5 


3 


do 


Early garden peas 


Aug. 30 


Cauliflower 


6 


3 


do 


Early turnips; radishes to mark 
rows 


Aug. 15-30 


Green beans 


7 


3 


do 


Green onions from sets 


do 


Cabbage 


8 


3 


Feb. 15-Mar. 15 


Spinach 


do 


do 


9 


3 


do 


Cauliflower 


Sept. 15-Oct. 1 


Spinach 


10 


3 


do 


100 ft. early beets, 100 early 
carrots 






11 


3 


do 


Dry onions from seed; radishes to 
mark rows 






12 • 


3 


do 


do 






13 


3 


do 


100 ft. parsnip; 100 ft. salsify; 
radishes to mark rows 






14 


3 


Mar. 1-30 


Medium garden peas 


Aug. 1-30 


Celery 


15 


3 


do 


Snap beans 


Oct. 1-15 


Turnip 


16 


3 


Mar. 1-30 


Early sweet corn 


Oct. 1-15 


Kale 


17 


3 


Mar. 15-Apr. 15 


Early sweet potatoes 


do 


Green onions 


18 


3 


do 


do 


do 


Beets 


19 


3 


Apr. 1-30 


Medium early snap beans 


do 


Collards 


20 


3 


do 


Medium early sweet corn 






21 


3 


do 


do 






22 


4 


Mar. 15-Apr. 15 


Early tomatoes 






23 


4 


do 


Medium early tomatoes 






24 


4 


do 


Pole lima beans 






25 


3 


do 


100 ft. egg plant, 100 ft. pepper 






26 


3 


do 


Okra 






27 


6 


do 


100 ft. cucumber, 100 ft. summer 
squash 






28 


6 


do 


Muskmelon 






29 


9 


do 


Watermelon 






30 


9 


do 


do 






31 


9 


do 


do 






32 


9 


do 


Winter squash 






33 


4 


May 1-30 


Main crop tomatoes 






34 


4 


do 


do 






35 


3 


do 


Third planting sweet corn 






36 


3 

144 


do 


do 







106 FARM MANAGEMENT 

A garden laid out according to this plan would contain a little less 
than ^3 acre. In addition it is advised that Yi acre of late sweet potatoes 
and yi acre of late white potatoes be planted to provide a winter supply 
of these vegetables. It is suggested that cowpeas or some other catch 
crop be planted between the rows of the long-season crops at their last 
cultivation and that fall and winter cover crops be planted on ground 
not occupied by vegetables all the season, these crops to be turned under 
for improving the soil. 

Size of Garden to Provide Vegetables. — The size of the garden necessary 
to supply vegetables for a family of a given number of persons will be 
influenced largely by the climatic conditions, the quality of the soil, the 
likes and dislikes of the family, and the method of cultivation of the gar- 
den (whether largely by horse labor, by man labor, or by a combination 
of both). 

Kentucky finds ^^ that a 34-acre plot, systematically cropped, can be 
made to supply a family of six. 

In California a garden on good soil, 100 ft. square, will furnish ample 
vegetables for a family of five, excepting potatoes and dry beans. 

Planning to Produce Fruit. — The family orchard is a factor in both 
reducing the Kving costs and in adding variety to the menu. 

Goodrich^^ suggests for a Southern family of five : 

10 apple trees 3 Japanese persimmon trees 

3 pear trees 11 peach trees 

2 plum trees 15 grape vines 

2 fig trees 25 dewberry vines 

strawberries between trees to extent desired. 

Taylor,^* with California conditions in mind, offers a plan of planting 
to include: 



6 apple 


2 walnut 


6 raspberry 


6 apricot 


2 pecan 


6 blackberry 


2 cherry 


6 pear 


6 hydrib berries 


2 nectarine 


1 quince 


12 currant 


.0 peach 


2 fig 


200 strawberry 


6 plum 


30 grape 


2 lemon 


4 prune 


6 oUve 


2 orange 


4 almond 







Several varieties of different times of ripening are to be selected^ to 
prolong the season of supply. 

Planning the Reorganizing of Going Concerns. — When a given farm 
business is already established but doubt is felt concerning the wisdom 
of continuing, a frank facing of assets and liabilities will aid. Merely 
talking the matter over with an interested audience often helps to clarify 
one's vision, especially if the audience is an understanding one. The 
mere presentation tends to crystallize one's ideas into concrete shape and 
brings about deductions to guide the future course of procedure. 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 107 

For instance, a certain ranch was devoted to alfalfa, dairy, and hogs. More capital 
was needed. Due to the small size of the dairy and hog herds, only about one-half 
the alfalfa acreage was required for stock needs. Alfalfa produced and sold as hay 
would command a price only sufficient to pay the cost of production. By turning 
under the excess acreage and planting to sugar beets and milo, a cash surplus of 
$2,000 above operating expenses was made available. 

In another case, the question arose as to whether a given farm business should be 
continued. Investigation showed that an expense of $13,000 could be met only to the 
extent of $12,000 — unless further investments were made. Heavy interest on deferred 
payments and a high cost of irrigation water were responsible. The estimate of 
$12,000 gross income did not include the risk of loss from disease or climatic factors. 
The only way to break even was a further investment of $10,000 the better to organize 
and conduct the business. 

A group of colonists located on small acreages, agreeing to make payments monthly 
or to forfeit their payments and improvements. Seventy-five per cent failed because 
of lack of capital or insufficient returns to pay running and household expenses and to 
meet payments all at the same time. Many of the failures were traceable to ignorance 
of farming or to carelessness in investigating the agricultural possibilities of their 
purchases. 

A man purchased 20 acres of shallow land, put in a pumping plant and seeded 
18 acres to alfalfa. His yields were 3}4 tons per acre, and his market paid $11. 
Even with this price, which happened to be a good one at the time for alfalfa in his 
section, his total income — $700 — -was not sufficient to meet his payments and pay 
operating expenses. Purchasing at $125 per acre, paying $25 down and assuming 
a debt of the remainder to be paid off in five equal installments with interest at 7 per 
cent, his annual payments amounted to $512 at the end of the second year. 

Suggestions for Reorganizing a Going Concern. — It behooves a man 
to make a careful study of his expenses and receipts in order to gain a 
clear cut understanding as to where he stands. If he cannot see his way 
clear under present arrangements to win out, he must take proper steps 
to reorganize his business. There is no given rule for making changes, 
but for most men some suggestion will be found in the following: 

(a) Increasing Acreage. — A larger acreage is needed. This may be 
secured by purchase or by leasing. 

Forty acres in barley, producing 16 sacks, worth on an average $2.00, gives a gross 
income of $1,280. If a gross income of $3,000 is needed and grain must be continued, 
by leasing at a rental of one-fourth the crop, this sum can be secured from 70 additional 
acres if same conditions are to be met on the leased land and equal care given the crop. 

(6) Change in Crop. — A change should be made in the character of 
crops being raised, selecting those oiEfering greater acreage returns. 

One hundred acres of land now cropped to Egyptian corn, yielding 2,000 lb. per 
acre, and worth $3.00 per hundredweight and costing $3,350 to produce, all work being 
hired, may be suitable for the production of sugar beets and raise 10 tons per acre, 
worth $10.00 per ton at a cost of $70. The returns above operating expenses could 
thus be increased from $2,650 to $8,000 by the substitution of a more profitable crop. 

(c) Introduction of Live Stock. — The introduction of live stock, either 
to provide an opportunity for utilizing one's labor to a greater extent, 
or to turn crops into greater profits by selling off as meat. 



108 FARM MANAGEMENT 

On an alfalfa ranch, situated far from a market, the crop, sold as hay, year in and 
year ort brought only the cost of production, S3 or $4. By feeding to dairy cows 
along with corn, silage, stock beets, or concentrated feeds, the operator can find 
profitable employment throughout the year instead of only during the summer 
months. Moreover, with cows producing an average of 20 lb. of milk daily for a 
300-day milking period, and the butterfat sold, the annual gross income per cow was 
$80. If $30 be set aside for labor and overhead charges and $20 for feeds other than 
hay, each cow paid $30 for the use of the alfalfa, or at the rate of about $8 per ton — 
while the cost of harvest was to some extent eliminated. The value of the hay was 
more than doubled. 

A small flock of sheep or poultry to consume farm or kitchen wastes and thus 
return an income for what would otherwise be wasted, is another example of the 
introduction of live stock. 

(d) Improving Soil Quality. — The building up of the quaHty of the 

soil. 

A farm situated on certain of the lighter types of soil, utilized for 50 years for 
grain, is capable of raising neither large nor varied crops under present conditions. 
By the use of green manure crops, stable manures, intelligent selection of certain com- 
mercial fertilizers, or the growing of leguminous crops, the land can once more be 
brought to a high state of productivity. 

(e) Utilizing Labor. — A change in cropping program to permit more 
work for man and stock, to eliminate idle horses, to increase the number 
of crops, or to work with less stock. 

If a farm is given over to the raising of one crop — barley for instance — it is evident 
that the bulk of the work comes during the months of preparing a seed bed and plant- 
ing — November, December, January, or February — and again during harvest — 
June and July. Sufficient stock must be available to get the crop planted or harvested 
within rather narrow limits of time. The stock is then usually idle the rest of the 
year — at least so far as work on the home place is concerned. If, however, instead of 
a straight grain program, other crops are included demanding attention at times not 
required by the grain, the stock, men, and implements can be worked more days and 
to better advantage. On the farm in mind milo, Egyptian corn, or beans might be 
included — thus helping out the work schedule and providing the first step towards a 
rotation of crops, something usually very desirable. Any of these crops can be put in, 
grown, and harvested, without interfering with the time required by the grain. 

When it costs about 25 ^ per day to feed a horse and an additional 25 ^ for overhead 
charges — interest, depreciation, horse-shoeing and mortality, each horse necessitates a 
yearly expenditure of $175. If a ranch, operating under such costs, consists of 320 
acres, and ten horses will handle the grain, then, under the usual method of grain rais- 
ing, they will work not to exceed 150 days out of the year. This makes a charge of 
nearly $12 a day for horse work. If, however, 120 acres should be put in summer 
crops and 200 acres in grain, the work could be handled by 8 horses — two head less — 
and there would be 185 days' work' available — or the cost per day would drop from 
$12 to less than $7. 

On another farm, it may be possible to institute a rotation of crops without increas- 
ing the number of work stock so that three crops can be secured in 2 years, thus adding 
to the number of sources of income. An irrigated farm now raising beans, crops 
might be rotated in a way to produce a summer crop of sugar beets, followed by a 
fall sowing of barley to be cut for hay, this in turn to be followed by a summer crop 
of a non-saccharine sorghum, or of beans. 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 109 

(/) Use of Tractor. — Replacement of horses with a tractor. 
On large areas farmed to grain or to one special field crop, study may indicate the 
desirability of replacing a certain amount of work stock by a gasoline tractor. This is 
particularly possible when a large number of horses must be kept the year round for 
a limited period of work; when two shifts can be worked to advantage on a rush job; 
when the tractor can be used for clearing land, breaking new ground, pumping 
for irrigation, in connection with a harvester, or when weedy grain makes horse 
harvesting diflBcult. 

(g) Financing. — Increased or better financing to utiUze land to better 
advantage. 

A farmer raising alfalfa on 230 acres, specializing in hay production, and maintain- 
ing 75 cows and 20 sows, finds (1) that alfalfa sold as hay pays but little more than 
the cost of production; (2) that the dairy is profitable; and (3) that the hogs are the 
most profitable. More financing is needed, however, in order to purchase stock to 
utilize the alfalfa in excess of that needed by the present herd. This, when secured on 
the basis of profits already made, will permit a doubling of the income right from the 
start. 

Another farm newly developed has an indebtedness of $8,000, payable one-fourth 
each year, with interest on deferred payments at 7 per cent. This means that $2,560 
must be forthcoming at the end of the first year, $2,420 at the end of the second year, 
and so on. Even if the ranch or general farm, contains as much as 100 acres, the 
indebtedness to be met places a heavy burden upon it. This is especially true in the 
case of young orchards when the crops which can be raised between the trees are 
limited in variety and acreage. By floating a new loan through other sources which 
will permit the loan to run five years before becoming payable and allowing payment 
to extend over a period of ten years, the new venture may be successfully financed, 
whereas in the first case the project would have great difficulty in making enough to 
meet the payments as they come due. This would be particularly true if the operator 
were not well versed in the handling of a farm under his local conditions. 

A reduction of the rate of interest from 8 to 7 per cent would result in a saving of 
$100 annually on a loan of $10,000. It should be stated, however, that, in financing 
farms, the rate of interest is of less importance than the terms of paying off the 
principal. One may have the choice of paying 7 per cent for the money he needs and 
be allowed 10 years to meet the loan, or he may pay 6 per cent and be obliged to wipe 
out all indebtedness in 5 years. While the character of the industry will determine 
the rate of speed with which the loan can be paid, the longer period, even at a slightly 
higher rate, is more desirable for the average man. 

(h) Providing Irrigation. — Provision for better irrigation. 

A certain ranch devoted to wheat is capable of raising high yields. Under dry- 
farming conditions, this would be 1,500 lb. If water could be secured for $2 an acre 
per year, the yield would be 2,000 lb. Taking into account the increased cost of 
harvest for the larger crop, the results would stand (1919 data): 

Total Cost, 
Cost to Cost of Cost of including taxes 

putin growing harvest and insurance 

Dry farmed $5.50 $8.50 $14.60 

Irrigated 5.50 $2.00 12.50 22.00 

Value of Gross profit in favor of 

yield.® 4 )s from 100 acres irrigation 

Dry farmed $30.00 $1,540 

Irrigated 40.00 1,800 $340 



110 FARM MANAGEMENT 

(^) Reducing Operating Expenses. — Many short cuts are possible in 
farm work with resultant reduction of operating expenses. 

One firm stacks hay with a crew of 19 men; another with a crew of 7 men. 
While the first puts up 60 tons a day, the work is not well organized and the hay 
costs QS^ a ton to stack. In the second field the cost is 50^ a ton, although the 
crew puts up but 36 tons a day. 

A certain small farm devoted to fruit production and run by a paid manager cut its 
annual expense from $2,700 to $1,500 by the substitution of a working foreman for a 
former office man. 

Other short cuts may be noted in such suggestions as: 

1. Water horses before feeding grain. 

2. Let fowls have the run of the corrals and save what would otherwise be waste 
grain. 

3. Use no good hay for bedding. 

4. Save time by the use of a large milk separator. 

5. Feed hay to stock cows in the field by placing in small bunches rather than in 
large piles. 

6. Save all grain sacks. 

7. Watch hired cooks — especially to see that they utilize leftovers. 

8. Feed eggs instead of meat when the hens are laying plentifully. 

9. Buy the cheaper cuts of meat, give plenty of milk and vegetables. Watch the 
garbage can as a check on a hired cook. 

10. Let cultivation replace excessive irrigation. 

11. Protect implements from the weather. 

12. Clean ditch banks before weeds go to seed. 

13. Repair machinery in advance of sending it into the field. 

14. Buy those things which can be purchased more cheaply than made or 
raised — i.e., farm implements, wagons, and the like. 

15. Provide proper sleeping quarters for the men. 

(j) Increasing Yields. — Increasing yields now below the optimum. 

On a certain ranch devoted to the production of potatoes, it was found that by 
plowing twice as deep, at an additional cost of $2.50, and giving $5 worth more of soil 
preparation and crop cultivation, the crop returns would be $20 to $30 additional for 
the $7.50 invested. 

There is, however, in crop production a point where increased yifelds 
can not be secured without disproportionate increased expenses. This is 
the so-called "point of diminishing returns." 

If a given ranch in a high state of cultivation is producing 4,000 lb. of barley per 
acre worth $1.10 per hundredweight, to effect an increase to 4,5001b. may necessitate 
field management involving an expenditure of $10 to $12, so that the increased yield 
is not sufficient to warrant the added cost required to obtain it. 

Planning Special Programs. — In localities, remote from sources 
of supply, where the time and energy involved will make proportionate 



ORGANIZING THE FARM BUSINESS 111 

returns, attempts should be made to include a good vegetable garden, 
a family fruit orchard, poultry, a cow or two, and enough hogs to consume 
the kitchen waste and to work over the stable manure. A judicious 
planting of flowers, shrubs, and lawn will always pay in added attrac- 
tiveness to the home. 

These items take time and close attention. They add materially to 
the variety of the table and offer additional income, but they make it 
necessary for some one to be on hand to milk, feed, and water 365 days in 
the year. For this reason many orchardists and others specializing in one 
or at most two or three crops do not take kindly to a change in program 
making, as it makes not only for more work but for greater confinement. 

Gathering Data in Planning. — The necessity for care in reasoning 
and calculating farm management problems may be judged from the 
following answers to a test question given advanced students who had had 
a term of class work, aski"ng as to the possibilities of profit from a given 
farm plan. The answer, for conditions existing at the time, was a $1,600 
labor income. 

Determinations of labor income were submitted as follows: 

$ 800 
1,000 
1,600 
2,300 
3,300 
4,900 
7,300 

The first two answers did not do the business credit; the last four 
would mean bankruptcy or close figuring if other means were not available 
than provided for in the plan. 

Correct Data Essential. — Special stress must be placed upon the neces- 
sity of using correct data in drawing deductions concerning any project. 
Each item entering into the scheme should be carefully scanned and 
critically tested. It is better to have too much rather than too little 
information. This applies to the prospective farmer, to the man who is 
thinking of agriculture as a field for investment, to the man already estab- 
lished who desires to know how he stands, and to the established farmer 
who wishes to branch out into larger or different industries. 

Sources of Data. — In this connection it is well to accept opinions only 
from reliable, well-informed, experienced, disinterested men versed in the 
local conditions affecting the problem. Precaution suggests the avoid- 
ance of data not directly applicable. The use of material collected from 
different sections of a state, and, therefore, applying only to state wide 
conditions should not be used as an absolute index to an individual ranch. 



112 FARM MANAGEMENT 

This may be illustrated by the influence of crop yields. Assume one is interested 
in the production of apples and finds it necessary to obtain $4,000 annually to cover 
interest, operating, and family expenses. K the land in mind is typical of the condi- 
tions prevailing in certain well-established commercial sections, and the crop is valued 
at an average of $1.00 per box, the acreage sufficient to produce this sum will vary 
with the possible yields. If the land is capable of producing best crops — and very few 
growers obtain them — of an annual output of 400 boxes per acre, only 10 acres of 
bearing orchard will be required to give $4,000. If the land will produce good crops 
of 250 boxes, 16 acres will be required instead of 10. Should the land, however, be 
only usual land and thus producing yields of 150 boxes, the area necessary to return 
$4,000 will amount to 27 acres. Hence the need of detailed knowledge: 

1. As to what sums are needed by the operator. 

2. A clear understanding as to the producing power of a given farm. 

This second point may be further amplified by studying its present 
production and its possible production if better methods are employed, 
which again will influence the necessary acreage. 



CHAPTER VI 
THE SOIL FACTOR 

Soil quality, with its far reaching effect upon crop production, 
claims an important place when plans are being drawn up to serve 
as a basis for conducting a farm business, and due consideration should 
be given to plans which provide for the maintenance or actual increase 
in soil productivity. 

Success in Farming Depends on Crop -producing Power of the Land. 
Continued success in farming largely depends on the crop-producing 
power of the soil; or, in other words, upon maintenance or increase of 
present fertility rests in great measure the earning power of the land. 
But in matters pertaining to soil fertility, science is far ahead of practice. 
That is, investigations of the need of improving soil conditions, and the 
methods by which such improvements can be attained, have advanced 
beyond actual field practice. Farmers are slow to take up methods of 
rebuilding soils, and yet of all practices, maintenance or increase of the 
crop-producing power of the land is first in importance. 

There would be no particular gain in analyzing why this is so; it makes 
little difference to what the delay and hesitancy are due. It may be 
lack of information concerning needs or methods, or lack of faith in the 
outcome, or indifference, or lack of courage to face a program often of 
long time duration, or it may be lack of capital or equipment, or inability 
to spare fields for the required periods. 

Correlating Recommendations and Practices. — The farm manager 
new to agriculture or to a community is likely to find himself at a loss 
properly to correlate two apparent extremes, the one being recommenda- 
tions of what should be done and how to proceed; the other what is 
actually being accomplished in a commercial way. There is as a rule 
sufficient evidence to support the recommendations, there are also 
conditions in many instances which operate to force a change in the sug- 
gested plan, and, at times, to prohibit its use in any way. 

For instance, a recommendation to plow under straw or manure, in dry land farm- 
ing where insufficient moisture is available to rot the mass of vegetation turned under, 
may result in the introducing of an insulating layer and seriously interfere with the 
germinating and growth of the next year's crop. Or the suggestion that a year be lost 
in growing cash crops so that a legume crop may be included in the rotation for green 
manure purposes, may curtail receipts to an untenable extent. A proposed plan in- 
cluding a hoed crop for the sake of killing weeds may be out of place where labor is 
scarce or at a premium. 

8 113 



114 FARM MANAGEMENT 

A farm manager should, however, be thoroughly posted concerning 
the recommended practices for maintaining or increasing the crop-pro- 
ducing power of the land, and should learn intelligently to sift out what 
can and what cannot be used to advantage. He should also be aware 
of the usual practice in the community, and possess a working knowledge 
of what has been tried and found wanting. 

Introducing New Practices. — To introduce new practices into a 
community requires courage, patience, perseverance, foresight, knowledge. 
Clear thinking and acting on the part of a farm manager to bring about 
a more stable agriculture through attention to soil matters, offers a real 
field for public service. 

Accepting Experiment Station Findings. — Since land must ordinarily 
be used for money-making purposes rather than as an experiment station, 
it pays to accept as correct the teachings of government and state 
institutions and to concern oneself only with how these apply to specific 
conditions. 

I have no wish to discourage experimentation. My aim rather is to 
impress the fact that one can not afford to duplicate extensive investiga- 
tions^ — e.g., green manuring as a means of replacing humus, proper 
preparation of the seed bed, selection of a pedigreed sire, age to breed, 
methods of feeding. These have been or are being well worked out. 
One can therefore spend his time to better advantage determining the 
adaptability of detailed findings for his particular farm. His queries 
should run — does my farm need green manuring? Will it pay me to 
utilize the stable manure produced? Shall I plow deep or shallow? 
Where can I secure pure seed? 

Take advantage of the findings of your agricultural institutions, see 
what your neighbors are doing, investigate every possible detail. 

Most individual problems are purely local, and involve a determina- 
tion as to how far the needs of a particular farm necessitate or permit 
the adoption of definite principles. 

There is much work to be done in proving that a well kept summer 
fallow will actually kill weeds, conserve moisture, and increase crops; 
that properly handled straw, manure and green vegetation will improve 
the humus content; that breaking of a plowpan, even though expensive, 
pays; that judicious use of fertilizers, intelligently handled, will often 
pay dividends; that properly handled stable and barnyard manure, 
properly cared for, has a substantial value. 

Ways of Improving Soil Quality. — Briefly summed up, the ways of 
improving soil quality are by use of one or more of the following methods: 

(a) Rotation, 

(6) Green manuring, 

(c) Commercial fertilizers, 

(d) Stable manures. 



THE SOIL FACTOR 115 

Will Improving Soil Quality Pay? — From the farm management 
viewpoint tlie question involved in considering the utilization of any 
(or all) of these is, will it pay? 

In our treatment of these subjects we shall follow a procedure to 
show : 

1. The definite purpose of each, 

2. Farm management recommendations, 

3. Extent of present actual use. 

ROTATION OF CROPS AND CROPPING SYSTEMS 

Definition of Rotation of Crops. — Rotation of crops is the utilization 
of botanically different crops in a sequence of planting. An example of a 
rotation is grain followed by potatoes the second year and beans the third; 
or alfalfa three years, followed by grain during the fall of the fifth year, 
corn the summer of the sixth year, grain the fall of the sixth year, and 
back into alfalfa the spring of the seventh year. 

Purpose of Rotation of Crops. — Rotation of crops first of all provides 
facilities for the preservation of fertility by permitting the growing of green 
manure crops to keep up humus and plant foods, by alternating deep 
and shallow rooted crops, by providing for a balanced removal of plant 
food, by providing for the actual restoring of plant food as in the case of 
nitrogen restored by legumes. It also aids in controlling insects, diseases, 
and weeds, and in permitting better methods of cultivation and an 
occasional advantageous change in the depth of plowing. 

Crop Rotation Presupposes Prepared Plan. — Rotation of crops 
usually presupposes the use of a well thought out plan for supf)lying 
sufficient feed — particularly roughage, hay, and pasture, with possibly 
grain for the stock — and for producing the most profitable cash crop or 
crops possible in the locality, in combination with a system which will 
build up productiveness, control pests, and systematize labor. 

Definition of Cropping System. — A cropping system is systematic 
crop rotation evenly balanced on several fields in such a way that one 
crop will follow another in a definite order and according to a definite 
plan, while yet uniform production is so maintained that the annual 
acreage of all crops remains constant year in and year out during the 
entire period of the rotation. 

Cropping systems cover, therefore, several fields under the standard 
rotation, and with this rotation so handled that at any given time each 
field is at a different stage of the rotation from the others, so as to insure 
a constant supply of products. 

Multiplying Cropping Systems. — More than one cropping system can 
be planned for the same farm, and in fact, if the farm is large enough more 
than one will be required. 



( 



116 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Determining Cropping Systems. — Just what rotation to institute will 
largely depend on the local conditions and the purpose for which the ranch 
is being run. 

For instance, where alfalfa and cattle are being raised, grain will fit in admirably, 
using one-half the ranch for grain and one-half for alfalfa, alternating a portion each 
year, as follows: alfalfa 4 years, grain annually for 4 years. Each year plow up one- 
fourth of the oldest and most run out aKalfa and seed to barley. During the same 
season seed down one-fourth of the last year's barley land to alfalfa. This may seem 
a short rotation, but it may be noted that cattle pastured on the alfalfa materially 
shorten its Ufe, so that it is well not to retain the planting too long. The barley 
benefits from the nitrogen left by the alfalfa, and at the same time its annual culti- 
vation kills out the foxtail, or other weeds that tend to creep into deteriorating 
stands of alfalfa. 

If labor conditions will permit, a corn crop can be grown between grain crops, or, 
if the soil requires humus, green manure crops can be substituted or run with the grain 
crops. 

Or if the general scheme is the production of potatoes, a rotation can be figured out 
to include alfalfa — both for its beneficial action on the soil and for the hay it will yield 
for the work stock, or if the land cannot be spared for alfalfa, another legume such as 
beans could be used. 

Rules for Use in Planning Rotations. — For general guidance in plan- 
ning rotation of crops or cropping systems the following rules are well 
had in mind. 

(o) Alternate crops requiring deep plowing with crops doing well with 
shallow plowing. 

(b) Aim to have the land in a perennial legume or sod for several 
consecutive years. 

(c) Follow a leguminous crop with a non-leguminous. 

(d) Follow a winter-growing crop with a summer crop rather than 
fallow, if the crop and water are available. 

(e) Follow deep rooting crops with shallow rooting crops. 

(/) Have a succession of crops always available for pasture purposes 
if stock feeds must be provided. 

(g) Avoid fallowing — better utilize a green manure crop. 

(h) In general a good rotation includes one money crop, one clean- 
tilled crop, one hay crop, one leguminous crop. 

(i) Alternate occasionally with a clean cultivated crop to control 
weeds. 

Example of a Rotation and Cropping System. — Having determined 
the crops which it is possible to grow at a profit on a given piece of land, 
a scheme can be evolved which will cover both the farm and the soil 
needs. The following example will illustrate crop rotations worked into 
a cropping system : 

Selecting the Crops. — Given a farm which has 640 acres of good tillable land, suit- 
able for alfalfa, beans, peas, beets, potatoes, and grain, the alfalfa, beans, and peas will 
usually fulfill all the requirements of the soil as regards nitrogen-gathering. When 



THE SOIL FACTOR 117 

the soil is poor in humus, or where the humus burns out rapidly, provision must be 
made for returning it to the soil. This can be accomplished most easily and quickly 
by sowing with the grain crop some form of green manure crop which can be left to 
make its growth after the grain is off, and can then be plowed under. Or, if ample 
water is available from rainfall or irrigation, after the grain is off, the land can be 
moistened and then prepared for the reception of the green manure crop. With the 
warm weather present in the summer time the crop will make a quick growth and will 
be ready for plowing under in the fall in time to permit it to rot during the winter. In 
the rotation which we will consider, clover can take the place of alfalfa, peas the place 
of beans, and oats, wheat, or barley can constitute the grain. 

Planning the Order of Crops for the Exam-pie. — After selecting the crops, which in this 
instance are to be alfalfa, barley, beans, and potatoes, the next step will be the planning 
of the order in which these crops are to be raised. In the majority of cases it will be 
found better to leave the alfalfa in for 2 years. By this method some hay can be 
obtained the first year, and considerable the second. The last crop should be left and 
plowed under. By this means humus is replaced in the soil. Alfalfa is lending itself 
as a most desirable crop, as the crops which follow it are recordbreakers. In order to 
facilitate the killing of alfalfa before putting in the next crop — something which can be 
done with comparative ease, as the alfalfa will not be old enough to possess roots of the 
size and toughness of old alfalfa fields — potatoes or beans should follow the alfalfa. 
Potatoes do very well on this land, and, as they do not tax the soil, they leave it in 
excellent shape for the beet crop. As they are planted in wide rows, the frequent 
and thorough cultivation which they require can be easily done and will at the same 
time kill the alfalfa shoots which may come up. Beets might follow the alfalfa, but 
more or less trouble would be experienced in cultivating. It is better for the beets to 
follow potatoes for 1 or 2 years. Grain follows the beets, part being cut for hay and 
part for grain. 

Including Commercial Fertilizers in the Example. — When commercial fertilizers are 
required, they will go on the crop will profit most. The manure, when used, will 
go on the land to be in potatoes or beets, being put on the previous fall, or on the grain 
crop. 

The Final Rotation of the Example. — The rotation for each field will, therefore, con- 
sist of: 

Table 35. — A Crop Rotation for a Given Farm 

First year beets 

Second year beans 

Third year grain 

Fourth year alfalfa 

Fifth year alfalfa 

Sixth year potatoes 

The Cropping System from, an Example. — To maintain approximately uniform annual 
production requires that several fields should be devoted to the rotation, and to follow 
out the scheme to the best advantage the farm should be divided into fields as nearly 
of the same size as possible. The ideal condition is level, uniform land under irriga- 
tion. But as this happy ideal is seldom met with, each farmer must do the best he 
can with what he has. This scheme would call for six fields, the farm would therefore 
be divided into six parts. Each part or field would then receive the treatment accord- 
ing to the scheme, each field starting in at a different point of the rotation the first 
year, that is, field No. 1 would have beets the first year, beans the second year and so on 
down the list. But field No. 2 would omit the first year's beets, starting with the 
second year and then continue. Field No. 3 would start in with the third year's 
crop — grain — and then continue, and so on until all the fields were accounted for. 



118 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Summed up, it would give: 

Table 36. — A Cropping System for a Given Farm 

Field First year Second year Third year Fourth year Fifth year Sixth yeah 

1 beets beans grain alfalfa alfalfa potatoes 

2 beans grain alfalfa alfalfa potatoes beets 

3 grain alfalfa alfalfa potatoes beets beans 

4 alfalfa alfalfa potatoes beets beans grain 

5 alfalfa potatoes beets beans grain alfalfa 

6 potatoes beets beans grain alfalfa alfalfa 

By this means one-sixth of the farm is in each of beets, of beans, and of barley or 
other grain, one-sixth in first-year alfalfa, one-sixth in second-year alfalfa, and one- 
sixth in potatoes. Congestion of work is prevented and provision is made for the 
principal crop to be beets, while the land is left in good shape for the succeeding crop. 
To Provide More Grain in the Example. — This example considers only one-sixth of 
the land in grain. If more is wanted, some variation will be required from the plan 
given above In such a case a rotation might prove feasible consisting of 

First year beets 

Second year grain followed by green manure crops 

Third year potatoes 

Fourth year beans 

In planning the rotations, those fields which are to have the same crops at the start 
should lie together to facilitate handling. 

Planning a Field Arrangement for Rotation of Crops. — When crop 
rotations are to follow a given plan involving much man and horse labor, 
or when the plan of the farm provides for a cropping system producing 
about the same acreage of pasture, cash, and feed crops annually, all 
fields, lanes, and fence lines, should be planned or rearranged in the most 
efficient way to save time and steps and to waste as little land as possible. 

Use of a Map in Arranging Fields for Crop Rotation. — In order to 
plan a permanent rotation of crops a map should be made of the fields of 
the farm. It is not necessary that this should be an actual survey, 
although a survey map is of great convenience; a drawing giving merely 
acreages of fields to within a quarter or even a half an acre is sufficient 
for practical purposes. An outline map may be made by first pacing the 
boundaries of the farm, noting the field divisions in the sections, and 
measuring angles. The figures thus obtained can then be applied to scale 
and the areas of the various fields secured by mathematical calculations 
based on dividing the map into triangles and getting their measurements 
in areas by using a ruler. The total of the fields should nearly check with 
the area of the farm as given in the deed. An easy way of measuring 
angles is to lay off a good distance, say 100 or 200 ft., down each leg of the 
angle and then to find the distance between these points. 

The advantage of such a map is obvious. It will give the farmer a 
better idea of the layout of the farm and make it easier to plan the crops. 
It can be used for recording important items for reference, such as crops 
gi'own, fertilizers or manures applied, total yield of crop per acre secured, 
cost of production, income and net profit per acre. 



THE SOIL FACTOR 119 

If the original map is drawn on tracing cloth, black line prints with 
a white background can be obtained at nominal cost, and any changes 
in crop acreage or field boundaries can be noted plainly;. 

GREEN MANURING 

Definition of Green Manure Crops. — Green manure crops are crops 
grown on the land and turned under green, or even dead, for the purpose 
of improving soil conditions. With certain crops, such as alfalfa, it is 
sometime possible to take off a cutting or two, but the majority of them 
are turned under without harvesting any part. 

Purpose of Green Manuring. — Green manure crops accomplish 
several' objects. Their main use, however, is to return humus and nitro- 
gen to the soil. Two classes of green manure crops are recognized — one 
with nitrogen-gathering power, and the other without. Plants such as 
beans, peas, vetches, bur clover, horsebeans, velvet beans, cowpeas, and 
clovers are nitrogen-gatherers, that is they are able to gain their nitrogen 
from sources other than the natural supply in the soil. It is gained by 
means of microscopic bacteria which develop in the knob-like excrescences 
or nodules found on the roots of such plants. Plants which do not have 
the capacity to gather their nitrogen by means of these bacteria are far 
less desirable green manure crops. Of course such nitrogen as non- 
legumes appropriate from the soil is returned when the plant is plowed 
under, but there is no increase. For most purposes one of the plants 
possessing the nitrogen-gathering property — a legume in other words — 
should always be selected for green manuring. 

Determining Need for Artificial Inoculation with Bacteria for Leg- 
umes. — Different legumes require different bacteria. No soil is naturally 
inoculated for all legumes although many soils are abundantly supplied 
with the bacteria needed by leguminous plants commonly grown in a 
community. Once in a while, however, an exception to this rule occurs 
and it is then necessary to introduce the required form of bacteria. 
Whether or not bacteria are needed can be usually told by examining the 
roots of the growing plants upon which they are desired. The plants 
should be carefully dug out — never pulled — and the clinging soil gently 
washed off in a stream of water. If on examination of the legume, which 
has been taken up so carefully that there was no chance of scraping off the 
nodules, none are found, it is a sign that the land needs bacteria. The 
small roots should be examined as well as the long main ones. 

Methods of Introducing Bacteria. — Several ways are open for gaining 
the needed bacteria. The use of half a load of soil from fields where the 
plants show the nodules can be resorted to, or else a supply of the bacteria 
in bottles can be secured from the United States Department of Agri- 
culture free of charge, with full directions for using. 

Definition of Humus. — Humus is partly decayed animal or vegetable 
matter. A green manure is not humus at the time it is turned under. 



120 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Various agencies of decay and disintegration must work upon this mass 
of green stuff and break down its composition. When the process has 
reached the point where there is no resemblance to the original material 
it is humus. Continued beyond this point it becomes nothing but ashes. 
Humus is the black, earthy material without definite form which gives 
soils their dark tint on being moistened. 

Purpose of Humus. — Humus plays a very important part in soil 
quality as it has the ability to mellow clay soils and perhaps to bind sandy 
soil, thus preventing crusting and cracking. It permits free circulation 
of air in the soil, gathers and retains moisture, binds loose sandy soils, 
and overcomes the close retentiveness of clays. Finally, in breaking 
down, it liberates plant food. 

Green Manure Crops as Sources of Humus. — The value of a green 
manure crop depends on the amount of humus and nitrogen which can 
be obtained from it. This is based on the amount of green growth pro- 
duced, found by weighing the crop, and by the plant's ability to collect 
nitrogen from the air, which is determined by chemical analysis. For 
most practical purposes the legume yielding the most tonnage will prove 
the best manure crop. Just what plant to use will depend on local condi- 
tions, one plant doing better in some sections than others. For most 
localities the vetch, Canada field pea, or alfalfa will probably be found 
satisfactory. In addition to the nitrogen gathered from the air by the 
nodule bacteria, other bacteria that live in the decaying vegetable matter 
also fix atmospheric nitrogen. 

Value of Plant Foods from Green Manure Crops. — The following 
table gives an idea of the different yields and the value of the crop in 
dollars and cents, based on its nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash 
content. It means that if these plant foods had to be purchased in the 
open market, in the form of commercial fertilizers, the cost would be in the 
neighborhood of the sum set opposite each crop. 

Table 37. — Money Value of Plant Foods from Green Manure Crop 

Values : Nitrogen 15 jf per lb. 

Phosphorus Q^. per lb. 

Potash 20 f! per lb. 

Note. — Both phosphorus and potash are taken from the soil and therefore are 
not net additions to be credited to the crop. 



Plant food value per 
ton of dry yield 




Yield dry per acre 
(tops and roots) 
estimated, tons 


Value per acre 


$ 9.39 


Vetch 


2.4 
1.6 
1.2 
4.4 
2.4 
1.1 


$22 


5.94 


Bur clover 


9 


5.20 


Cowpeas 


6 


5.46 


Barley 


24 


6.21 


Melilotus indica 


25 


14 62 


Alfalfa (young) 


16 









THE SOIL FACTOR 121 



COMMERCIAL FERTILIZERS 



Important Elements. — Of the more common elements required for 
plant growth, phosphoric acid, potash, nitrogen, and lime, when added 
to the soil, usually increase yields. The mineral manures or fertilizers 
on the market today are designed to furnish these ingredients, either as 
simple elements or else in proportions mixed for special crop needs. 

Getting Value from Commercial Fertilizers. — With the increasing 
use of commercial fertilizers the problem of how to secure the most value 
from them is worth considering. Under proper conditions fertilizer 
investments place an additional burden upon the crops so great that any 
way of saving which will lighten this burden should be practiced in justice 
to the crop. When improper methods are followed, the cost of fertilizing 
can easily run up into such prohibitive amounts that no recompense will 
follow the use of commercial fertilizers. 

In general, five possible ways of saving money spent upon fertilizers 
suggest themselves to the scientific farmer. Summed up they are: (a) 
by supplying only such elements as actually give results, eliminating 
all others; (h) by supplying better cultivation, pruning, spraying, 
and other farm practices, rather than by counting on the stimulating 
effects of fertilizers ; (c) by closely checking up the plant food values of all 
purchased fertilizers; (d) by mixing the ingredients for any special for- 
mula on the farm, when the same combination can not be purchased 
equally cheap in the open market; and (e) by using high-grade materials 
in preference to those carrying but small percentages of plant foods. 

In fertilizing, the cost of the fertilizer must be more than offset by 
greater net returns, whether this be from increased quantity or better 
quality; or by prolonging the life of the tree, in case of an orchard; or 
by enhancing growth. Whether fertilization will pay or not depends 
on whether they increase yields sufficiently. In well drained, deep, well 
tilled soils, properly supplied with organic matter from stable or green 
manure crops, a special element may still be profitable as a fertilizer. 

To secure the greatest value for the money invested, the first step is 
to choose a fertilizer which embodies all the needs of the crop, and to 
supply the fertilizer for its food value alone. The second step is to check 
up the plant food value of the fertilizer and compare it with the purchase 
price. 

How Commercial Fertilizers are Priced. — Fertilizers are sold either 
at a ton price or at so much per unit or pound of plant food contained — a 
unit representing 1 per cent of a ton, or 20 lb. Of the two methods, the 
second is by far the fairer of the two. It carries with it a guarantee that 
the purchaser is getting all that he pays for, as he can quickly check up 
the value of the fertilizer by multiplying the guaranteed analysis given 
him by the manufacturer, or printed on the tag attached to the sacks of 
fertilizer, with the current trade value of the plant foods. 



122 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Correctness of Analyses. — The usual guarantee is correct, because a 
strict watch kept by each State Experiment Station over all fertilizers 
sold in bulk tends to eliminate deceit. From the Director of the Station 
can be obtained a statement as to the value of the different ingredients. 
These vary in different states, because to the original cost must be added 
freight rates from points of supply. 

When buying is done at ton prices, the value of the fertilizer can be 
quickly determined from a knowledge of plant food values, and thus a 
close check can be kept on all fertilizer purchases. 

Farm Mixtures Versus Factory Mixtures. — Whether it will prove 
cheaper to buy the natural elements and mix them on the farm can be 
rapidly answered by comparing the cost of the material as put up by the 
fertilizer company with the cost to the farm of buying the raw materials 
and going to the expense of mixing them. 

High-grade Materials Preferable. — Other things being equal, ferti- 
lizers made of high-grade materials, or in other words, testing high in 
analysis, are to be preferred, the cost of mixing, sacking, freighting, hand- 
ling, carting, and spreading being materially reduced. The usual filler is 
of little or no value to the land and can be left out just as well as not. 
Should it have any value, as lime, it can usually be put on more cheaply 
as a separate ingredient. 

Stable Manures 

Composition of Stable Manures. — The composition of manure differs 
with age, feed, the kind of animals producing it, and with the handling 
it receives before going on the field. General approximate analyses 
show the following amounts of plant foods present: 



Table 38. — ^Composition of Stable Manures 





Pounds per ton of manure 




Nitrogen 


Phosphorus 


Potash 


Cow manure, with straw, fresh from 
stable 


9 

10 
10 


6 

6 

8 


9 


Horse manure, with straw, fresh from 
stable 


10 


Mixed manure, from yard, spring 


12 



Cash Value of Stable Manures. ^At the prevailing prices for these 
ingredients (1920) the manure is worth from $3.51 to $4.38 a ton, or an 
average of $3.92. In this calculation, values per unit used are nitrogen 
$3.00, phosphorus $1.20, potash $4.00. 



THE SOIL FACTOR 123 

Physical Value of Stable Manures. — The value of its plant foods is 
not the sole value of the manure. In addition it has a marked humus value, 
and for soils light in color, sticky, dense, with little porosity and friability, 
and liable to bake and crack, it will prove very beneficial. It will loosen 
heavy, compact soils and bind light ones, thus making both kinds easier 
to handle, warmer, better moisture collectors and retainers, and more 
suitable for plant growth. Often the need of humus is so great that the 
cost of getting the manure on the land can well exceed the fertilizer value. 
Just how much the manure will be worth when bought outside the ranch 
will depend on how badly the land needs the humus and on what increased 
crops the fertilizer ingredients are capable of producing. 

Limitations of Stable Manures. — Manure is rather slow in action, and 
its nitrogen does not become immediately available. For this reason 
when rapid forcing results are desired, it is well to supplement the manure 
with some quick commercial form of fertilizer, as nitrate of soda. This 
slow action is most noticeable on heavy soils, and even here is more 
marked with fresh manure. With soils of this character rotted manure 
is best for quick fertilizing results. But for bettering the physical texture 
fresh manure will prove more desirable. On light or sandy soils the 
reverse holds true, that is, fresh manure for quick fertilizing and well 
rotted for improving physical texture. 

Cold and Warm Manures. — Manures from cows and hogs are classed 
as cold manure. They contain much water, and heat and ferment slowly. 
That from horses and sheep is classified as warm manure. These heat 
and ferment quickly, dry rapidly, and are in danger of burning. Mixing 
tvarm and cold manures can be done to the advantage of both. 

Amount of Stable Manures Produced by Live Stock. — As each horse 
will produce about 50 lb. of manure a day, cows 60 to 80 lb., sheep 23^^ to 
33-^ lb., and hogs 6 to 8 lb., the amount of manure on the average farm is 
considerable and will well repay attention to its preservation. 

Handling Stable Manures. — If the manure can not be hauled as made, 
it should be kept under cover and treated with some kind of absorbent 
to prevent the escape of the ammonia. Just what absorbent to use will 
depend on the needs of the soil. If the soil is deficient in potash or phos- 
phoric acid materials strong in these should be used. When used on the 
manure they need not be put on the field as extra applications. Kainit 
will provide potash, and finely ground phosphatic rock or acid phosphate 
will give the phosphoric acid. If no fertilizer is needed, gypsum (calcium 
sulphate) will serve the purpose of holding the ammonia most admirably. 
These should be used at a rate of 2 lb. per hundred of manure. They can 
be dusted over the manure piles every day or else sprinkled in the stalls. 

Stable Manures Tend to Force Growth. — Manure tends to force 
growth and is better for grasses and forage crops than for grains. For 
sugar beets, potatoes, or tobacco it should be used on the preceding crop 
in the rotation. 



124 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Recommendations for Use of Crop Rotations, Commercial Fertilizers 
and Stable Manures 

Since theory and practice in the general use of crop rotations, commer- 
cial fertilizers, and stable manures are somewhat divergent, and because 
local practices vary, a rather full discussion follows concerning (a) common 
farm management recommendations and (b) common local practices. 

Farm practices as commercially carried on locally, give an idea of what 
farmers are actually doing. Local practices vary but these must govern 
in determining a starting point in planning the work, so that the general 
statements given here are to be used as indicative rather than for actual 
guides. As in much farm management work, an intimate' knowledge of 
methods practiced in a given state, or better in a given community, must 
precede actual planning if best results are to be obtained. 



Recommended Crop Rotations 



39 



Crop rotations primarily designed to meet the varying conditions of 
different localities are listed below. These have been drawn from various 
sources, but particularly from the suggestions of men in the Office of 
Farm Management, U.S.D.A. They offer a starting point for planning 
the work in communities having similar conditions. 

Further than to indicate examples it is not necessary to go, as there 
is ample information elsewhere available in textbooks, treatises, and in 
State and Federal agricultural bulletins. 

Crop Rotations Recommended for Farms in Northern Latitudes. — 
A cropping system that will furnish a home-grown ration in which corn 
and alfalfa are the principal feed crops may be arranged as follows: 

Acre 

Permanent alfalfa 25 

Rotation : 

1. Corn for silage or grain 20 

2. Oats 20 

3. Oats or barley 20 

4. Pasture 20 

5. Pasture 20 

Another rotation also well adapted for northern regions 

Acres 
Corn for silage 18 

Rotation : 

1. Soy beans 18 

2. Oats or barley 18 

3. Clover or timothy 18 

4. Pasture 18 

5. Permanent alfalfa 15 

6. Permanent pasture 20 



THE SOIL FACTOR 125 

Crop Rotations Recommended for Farms in Middle Latitudes. — 

A number of rotations well suited to middle latitudes will furnish a home- 
grown ration for farm animals, as follows: 

ACKE8 

1. Permanent alfalfa 25 

Permanent pasture 40 

Rotation : 

1. Corn for grain or silage 12 

2. Corn for silage 12 

3. Oats or wheat 12 

4. Wheat 12 

5. Clover and timothy 12 

2. Permanent pasture 40 

Rotation : 

1. Corn for grain or silage 12 

2. Corn for silage 12 

3. Wheat 12 

4. Alfalfa 12 

5. Alfalfa 12 

3. Permanent alfalfa 25 

Permanent pasture 40 

Rotation : 

1. Corn for grain or silage 12 

2. Mangels or other roots 6 

3. Soy beans for grain. 6 

4. Corn for silage •. 12 

5. Wheat 12 

6. Clover and timothy 12 

Rotation (1) gives an opportunity for more wheat and less hay. It also illustrates 
the manner of changing the alfalfa field when this is necessary, in this case by planting 
alfalfa on fields 3 and 4. 

Rotation (2) will produce more highly nitrogenous hay and a larger gross income 
from crops, and permit the sale of surplus alfalfa hay. 

Rotation (3) introduces mangels as a root crop to supplement silage and alfaKa. 

On the whole these rotations give the greatest variety of forage crops 
and the most satisfactory home grown ration. The farmer need not 
worry about feed prices when such a system has been permanently estab- 
lished. From a business standpoint rotation is important because 
it increases crop yields, distributes the risk of crop failures, and gives a 
better distribution of farm labor. 

Other possible rotations are: 

Three-year rotation: First year, cultivated crop, as com; second year, grain; 
third year, clover or some annual leguminous crop. Rape can be sowed among the 
corn, and if, instead of clover, an annual leguminous crop is used, rape can be sowed 
among the wheat. 

Four-year rotation: First year, cultivated crop; second and third years, clover 
and timothy; fourth year, grain; or, first year, cultivated crop; second year, annual 
leguminous crop; third and fourth years, grain, planting rape or turnips among the 
cultivated and grain crops, which here are sown in the spring. 



126 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Five-year rotation: First year, cultivated crop; second year, grain; third and 
fourth years, clover and timothy; fifth year, grain, planting rape among the corn 
or other cultivated crop the first and among the grain crop the fifth year. 

Six-year rotation: First year, cultivated crop; second year, grain crop; third, 
fourth, and fifth years, grass; sixth year, grain; or, first year, cultivated crop; second 
year, grain crops; third and fourth years, clover and timothy; fifth and sixth years, 
grain; or, first year, cultivated crop; second year, grain; third and fourth years, clover 
and timothy; fifth year, cultivated crop; sixth year, grain, planting catch crops in the 
grain and corn. 

Crop Rotations Recommended for Ai'kansas. — McNair^- offers sugges- 
tive rotation systems for Arkansas, for the average family farmed acreage 
of 28 to 38 acres, growing principally 200 lb. of lint cotton and 20 bu. of 
corn, worked with two horses and the labor of a man and a boy. Start- 
ing with a common system of two-thirds cotton (22 acres) and one third 
corn (11 acres), cowpeas planted in the corn, 10 sj^stems are discussed, 
ending with a system including alfalfa in the rotation and providing a 
plentiful use of cowpeas, potatoes, and sorghum hay. From his study, 
McNair bears down on the necessity of diversification and use of legumes, 
such as cowpeas, peanuts, soy beans, and alfalfa. 

Crop Rotations Recommended for Utah. — From his Utah studies of 
the main labor requirements of strawberries, raspberries, peaches, prunes, 
pears, apples, alfalfa, small grain, tomatoes, potatoes, onions, sugar 
beets, canning peas, snap beans, edible dry beans, Connor^'' outlines a 
"feasible but purely tentative cropping system for a man on a small 
Utah farm where it is desired to concentrate on sugar beets. " 

Table 39. — Crop Rotations Recommended for Utah 
(Reg. = regular : ext. = extra) 



Period 



Days 
avail- 
able 



Cropping system 



Alfalfa 
15 acres 



. Small-grain 
12 acres 



Sugar beets 
15 acres 



Total 
42 acres 



Days of labor Days of labor Days of labor Days of labor 



Reg. 



Ext. 



Reg. 



Ext. 



Reg. 



Ext. 



Reg. 



Ext. 



Winter 

Mar. 1-May 1. 
May 1-July 1. 
July 1-Sept. 1 . 
Sept. 1-Nov. 1 
Nov. 1-Dec. 1. 



46 
35 

42 
50 
42 
20 



2.55 

8.70 

11.70 

8.70 









30.00 




30.00 




9.84 




14.55 




26.94 


375 


4.20 




40.05 


19.50 


52.95 


375 


6.96 


9.60 


16.20 


10.05 


34.86 


375 






18.75 


75.00 


27.45 




8.04 




15.00 




23.04 



23.25 
23.40 

78.75 



The only periods when the operator of such a farm as above would be 
rushed occur during the blocking and thinning of the sugar beets, and at 
the harvest season for the same crop. In practice some men on one- 
man farms grow larger areas of beets without difficulty in securing 
harvest labor. They exchange with neighbors for part of the harvest 
requirement and hire the rest. The cropping system outlined would en- 



THE SOIL FACTOR 127 

able a man to concentrate on beets, would give him two cash crops — 
grain and sugar beets, and would provide a goodly supply of hay for 
farm stock. The beet harvest is carried on intermittently from the 
latter part of September until the first or the middle of November, and 
sometimes even later. The rotation which is given has been followed 
in actual practice in this community, as shown by a survey of 58 beet 
farms. 

Crop Rotations Recommended for Georgia. — The Georgia State 
College of Agriculture recommends (1919) the following acreages of crops 
to be grown on the average Southern one-horse farm: 

5 acres in corn and velvet beans. 

5 acres in cowpeas for hay to be followed by winter oats. 
5 acres in cotton. 

5 acres in peanuts, to be crushed for oil or grazed down by hogs. 
1}4 acres in sweet potatoes, to be followed by winter cover crops. 
1 acre in rape, oats, vetch, cowpeas, or soy beans. 
1 acre in truck crops, followed by hay, or grazing crops for hogs. 
10 acres should be set aside for pasturage for cows and hogs. 
J^ acre in orchards. 
1^ acre in garden. 
Total cultivated land, 26 acres. 

This size farm should maintain, in addition to the one horse or mule 
used for work, the following to supply the family with meat, butter, 
chickens, and eggs: 

1 calf 1 yearling (slaughter for meat) 

2 milk cows 2 brood sows 

50 hens 

Recommended Green Manures 

Green Manures Recommended for Farms of the Gulf Coast Region 
of Alabama, Mississippi, and West Florida. — Since practically no 
farms in the region maintain enough live stock to supply sufficient 
manures for soil needs, Crosby^^ suggests increased use of such legumes 
as velvet beans, cowpeas, soy beans, bur clover, vetch, crimson clover, 
peanuts, beggarweed, and lespedeza or Japan clover. The addition of 
vegetable matter is felt to be of primary importance in this section. 

Green Manures Recommended for Sandy Lands of Indiana, Michigan 
and Ohio. — Keenly recognizing the necessity of suggesting means of 
soil improvement under existing handicaps of poor land and lack of 
capital, Drake^^ offers soy beans and cowpeas, both for sale and for feed, 
as an approach to the problem of soil improvement for the sandy farms 
under conditions similar to those of northern Indiana, southern Michigan, 
and a part of northwestern Ohio. In order of importance, fertilization 
should provide for nitrogen and organic matter as of first consideration, 
then phosphorus, with lime third, and potash as of least moment. 



128 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Green Manures Recommended for the Coastal Plain. — For the 

coastal plain section of New Jersey, Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia, 
decreasing fertility resulting in reduced yields now presents the big 
problem of economically getting organic matter into the soil. Miller^'' 
points out three ways — farm manure, roots and stubbles left from crops, 
and green crops turned under. Of these it was found that merely 
alternating crops was not sufficient, that while crop residues helped, the 
addition of live stock or the regular turning under of green crops was needed. 
Because of lack of live stock, greatest reliance must be placed on growing 
crops to supply organic matter. Crops suggested in order of value are 
cowpeas, crimson clover, soy beans, vetch, red clover, rye, and buckwheat. 
In addition to humus, use of legumes or a mineral fertilizer to supply 
nitrogen, and economical application of phosphoric acid and potash, are 
recommended. 

Green Manures and Other Fertilizers Recommended for Kentucky 
and Tennessee. — Farm practices that increase crop yields in Kentucky 
and Tennessee are reviewed by Arnold in a Farmers' Bulletin^^ as compris- 
ing fertilizers, lime, keeping of live stock, plowing under of by-products 
such as straw, legumes, and grasses. An essential basis of fertilizing is a 
plentiful supply of vegetable matter. While great variations in soil 
types, topography, and kinds of farming, make general rules inadequate, 
the evidence indicates the planting of legumes to supply nitrogen for 
bluegrass soils (the order of value being red clover, alsike clover, Japan 
clover (Lespedeza), sweet clover, crimson clover, vetch, cowpeas, soy 
beans, Canada field peas), the addition of both nitrogen and acid 
phosphate to other soils, the general use of lime, the occasional use of 
nitrate of soda as a stimulant, the increased use of live stock for the manure, 
the desirableness of growing bluegrass, redtop, timothy and other 
forage grasses, and the plowing under of straw, stalks, weeds, stubble, 
and leaves, as all being of value. 

Evidence of Improvement from Farm Practice to Increase the Crop- 
producing Power of the Land 

Evidence of improvement resulting from the use of legumes, green 
manure crops, rotation of crops, commercial fertilizers, and stable manure 
must be sought in the older agriculture of the United States. Study of 
farm practices in sections of depleted soils and resulting low yields fur- 
nishes abundant evidence of the efficacy of these methods to increase the 
crop-producing power of the soil. 

Evidence from the Coastal Plain. — Miller ^'^ says, " Perhaps the most 
rapid progress in the improvement of depleted farm lands in this section 
(the Coastal Plain Section of Central Atlantic States) is attributable 
to this method of procedure" {i.e., crops grown for the purpose of supply- 
ing organic matter). 



THE SOIL FACTOR 129 

In the same publication, four detailed examples from actual farms are 
described. Use of cowpeas and crimson clover as green manure crops 
in 5 years raised the corn yields from averages of 15 and 18 bu. to 40 
and 50 bu. on one Virginia farm. The growing of cowpeas, crimson 
clover, and rye over a period of 4 years raised the yields on a Virginia 
sandy cotton land from the point where tenants refused to work the land, 
to more than a bale of cotton per acre (570 lb. of lint) and to 40 bu. of 
corn per acre. By growing red clover, sodding, and intelligent fertilizing, 
wheat yields from a Delaware farm were raised from 83^ to 30 bu. Corn 
yields of 12 to 15 bu. climbed to 50 bu. on another Delaware farm — 
situated on a coarse sand — by continual use of crimson clover with judi- 
cious use of fertilizers. 

Evidence from Kentucky and Tennessee. — Arnold^^ gives six out- 
standing examples of Kentucky and Tennessee farms which have in- 
creased their crop production by intelligent cropping plans and judicious 
use of fertilizers. A 300-acre live stock and grain farm is getting 100 
per cent better yields than the average in the community. A 200-acre 
farm, practically abandoned, was in 8 years developed into "one of the 
most productive farms in the State " by use of live stock and soil building 
with rye, vetch, cowpeas, Alsike, red clover, and various grasses. With a 
4-year rotation of corn, rye, oats, or wheat, and 2 years of clover or mixed 
grasses for meadow and pasture, together with legumes and proper fer- 
tilization utilized in connection with stock, a Kentucky farm increased 
its yields from 2 to 6 bu. of wheat and 10 to 15 bu. of corn to as high as 
27 bu. of wheat and 70 bu. of corn. In the three other examples, yield 
increases are noted of from 100 per cent to as much as 300 per cent by 
use of stock, crop rotations, legumes, green manures, lime, and acid 
phosphate. 

Evidence from the Gulf Coast Region. — Ashley^^ finds for the Gulf 
Coast Region that in general, farm experience shows that the incorpora- 
tion of large quantities of vegetable matter into the soil is the principal 
factor in building up and maintaining soil quality in this section, and any 
system of farm practice which fails to recognize this will fail in maintain- 
ing crop productiveness at a point that insures profitable farming. Ex- 
amples of successful farming based on rotation and green manure crops 
are taken from Baldwin County, Alabama, and from Mississippi. In one 
instance it is pointed out that following 5 years of good .farm practices 
yields increased from 15 to 35 bu. of corn, 10 to 20 bu. of velvet beans, 
with other crops in like proportions. 

Actual Farm Practices in the Use of Crop Rotation, Commercial 
Fertilizers, and Stable Manures 

Much publicity is given to recommending results of experiments and 
experiences pointing the way to the maintenance or increase of the crop- 



130 FARM MANAGEMENT 

producing power of the soil; so much so that the question arises as to 
what extent farmers have adopted new methods. Believing that at least 
a partial answer will be of aid to the farm manager in connection with 
planning what should be done, a rather full discussion is inserted. These 
data, collected by field men of the Federal Oflfice of Farm Management, ^^ 
were made available to me in January, 1919. 

The notes on actual farm practices are interesting in that they tend 
to show the slowness with which farmers have taken up the recommenda- 
tions for increasing the crop-producing power of their land, and the wide 
variations in practice, which of course reflect the great differences exist- 
ing in soil, types of agriculture, and local variations in farming methods. 
Only general practices are included, no attempt being made to treat of 
local or individual variations, although these are many and striking. 

Under rotations the order of cropping is noted. Unless specifically 
mentioned, the cropping is for a single period. 

Under fertilizers in writing of a "2 — 10 — 2" formula, use is made 
of the common practice in designating a fertilizer according to its content, 
usually guaranteed, in order of nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash. 
Formulae are from pre-war, normal time, studies. Great variations in 
price, composition, and amounts used have resulted because of war 
conditions, the principal effect perhaps being the almost complete elimina- 
tion of potash from all formulae. 

Rotations in Use by Farmers^^ 

Rotations Used by New England Farmers. — A standard dairy farm 
rotation is: 

First year — Corn for silage or for grain, and potatoes for home use. 
Second year — Oats, barley, or mixed grain to be threshed or cut for hay. 
Third year — Clover. 
Fourth year to seventh year — Mixed hay (mostly timothy). 

A potato rotation of Aroostoock County, Maine is: 



First year — Potatoes. 
Second year — Potatoes. 
Third year — Oats. 
Fourth year — Clover. 
Fifth year — Mixed hay, 



Rotations Used by New York Farmers. — The dairy region rotation of 
southern New York is: 



First year — Cultivated crops of cabbage or potatoes. 
Second year — Cultivated crops of corn for silo. 
Third year — Oats for cash crops and grass for feed. 
Fourth year — Clover and timothy for 2 or 3 years. 



THE SOIL FACTOR 131 

The rotations of the cereals and hve stock section of central New 
York is: 

First year — Oats. 

Second year — Barley. 

Third year — Wheat. 

Fourth year — ^Meadow for several years. 

Rotations Used by Pennsylvania Farmers. — A rotation common to the 
dairy region of northern Pennsylvania is: 

First year — Cultivated crops, usually corn for silage or potatoes for cash crops. 
Second year — Oats, wheat, or rye for feed and catch crop for grass. 
Third year — Grass for hay (or pasturage until it runs out — 2 or 3 years). 

A definite rotation as practiced on general farms of Delaware and 
Chester Counties is: 

First year — Corn. 

Second year — Corn for silage, potatoes for family use, and the remainder of the 

field in oats. 
Third year — Wheat. 
Fourth year — Clover and timothy for hay, the field often held for 3 years. 

Lancaster County, tends to a rotation of: 

First year — Corn. 

Second year — Tobacco. 

Third year — Wheat. 

Fourth year — Clover for 1 and sometimes for 2 years. 

Cumberland Valley uses: 

First year — Com. 

Second year — Oats. 

Third year — Wheat. 

Fourth year — Clover and timothy, 1 to 3 years. 

Rotations Used by New Jersey Farmers. — The white potato section in 
central part of the state uses a general rotation of : 

First year — Com. 

Second year — Potatoes (sometimes followed by potatoes a second year). 

Third year — Clover and timothy (sometimes preceded by a crop of wheat). 

The trucking region of Gloucester County makes little attempt to 
rotate, although a rotation is sometimes put in of: 

First year — Corn. 

Second year — Sweet potatoes. 

Third year — Early tomatoes, cantaloupes, egg plants, or pepper. 

Fourth year — Clover and timothy. 



132 FARM MANAGEMENT 

The small fruit and trucking section of Gloucester County has a 
rotation consisting of: 

First year — White potatoes. 

Second year — White potatoes or strawberries. 

Third year — Strawberries. 

Fourth year — Strawberries and sometimes beans as a second crop. 

Rotations Used by Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia Farmers. — There 
are many different rotations on the grazing, general farming, and fruit 
lands of western Maryland and western Virginia. A common one is: 

First year — Corn. 

Second year — Small grains. 

Third year — Grass for 1 year or more. 

In the truck, small fruits, peanuts, cotton, and general farming 
sections of Delaware, eastern Maryland, and eastern Virginia, no 
definite rotations are followed, largely because of the variety of crops 
and the variation in selection from year to year. Some attempt is made 
to introduce a legume from time to time. 

Very little definite rotating is practiced in the tobacco district of 
southern Virginia. Lands for tobacco are set aside for this specific 
purpose, and tend to a 3-year rotation of tobacco, rye, and redtop 
pasture. 

Rotations Used by North and South Carolina Farmers. — Crop rotations 
are planned with a tendency to grow first the crops needed for home use, 
such as corn, oats, cowpeas, and truck, the remainder of the land being in 
cotton. This usually results in planting cotton on the best soil and cow- 
peas on land needing improvement, with corn and oats on the fields less 
adapted to cotton and not requiring immediate improvement. In 
typical cotton areas, 60 per cent of the cropped area is given over to 
cotton, one crop following another. 

Rotations Used by Alabama and Mississippi Farmers. — Rotation of 
crops is not followed in any general way. Principally a cotton country, 
with a large percentage of the land in this crop (running as high as 75 
per cent), a definite crop rotation is hardly practicable, and any attempt 
toward rotating is more a matter of convenience than a matter of pre- 
conceived plan. Soils are usually selected according to what they are 
best suited for, with some provision for soil restoration by green manure 
crop. 

Rotations Used by Kentucky, Tennessee, and West Virginia Farmers. — 
No well-defined single system is followed in the bluegrass lands of 
Kentucky, Tennessee, and West Virginia. A typical rotation is: 

First year — Corn or tobacco. 
Second year — Small grain, usually wheat. 
Third year — Red clover, grass, or hay. 
Fourth year — Grass for pasture. 
Fifth year — Grass for pasture. 



THE SOIL FACTOR 133 

Where orchard grass is grown for seed in Jefferson County, Kentucky, 
common rotation is: 
First year — Corn or potatoes. 
Second year — Wheat. 



Third year — Orchard grass for hay. 
Fourth year — Orchard grass for seed. 
Fifth year — Orchard grass for seed. 



Rotations. Used by Iowa, Indiana, and Ohio Farmers. — While in general 
the rotations vary from 2 to 5 years in duration, there are wide varia- 
tions in practice. Certain prevailing practices give point: 

Two-year Rotation (grain farms). 

First year — Corn. 

Second year — Oats or wheat with a seeding of red clover or sweet clover. 

Three-year Rotation (grain or live stock farms). 
First year — Corn. 
Second year — Oats or wheat. 
Third year — Red clover or sweet clover. 

Four-year Rotation (grain and live stock farms). 



(a) First year — Corn 
Second year — Oats 



Corn 
Corn 



aecona year — uats oorn 

Third year — Wheat \ or \ Oats (or wheat if previous crop is cut for silage) 

Fourth year — Clover I Clover (sometimes mixed with timothy and 



^ [ pastured a 5th year) 

(6)* First year— Wheat ) [Wheat 



Second year — Wheat [ J Clover 

Third year — Clover f or 1 Wheat 
Fourth year — Corn j [ Corn 



Six-year Rotation (on certain alfalfa farms). 

First year — Corn 

Second year — ^Corn. 

Third year— Barley with a seeding of alfalfa. 

Fourth year — Alfalfa. 

Fifth year— Alfalfa. 

Sixth year — Alfalfa. 

Rotations not Available to Farmers of the Western Plains Area, Kansas, 
Nebraska, and Dakotas. — Lack of rainfall and limited number of available 
crops prevents a well established rotation. 

Rotations Used by Montana and Utah Farmers. — A typical rotation 
on irrigated land in vicinities of Montana, and in Provo and Bear 
River Valley, Utah, is: 

Alfalfa — 3 to 8 years. 

Grain — 1 year. 

Sugar beets — 5 years. 

Grain — 1 year. 

* Sometimes on the thinner lands timothy is substituted for clover and mowed for 
several successive years. 



134 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Where corn growing is of chief interest the rotation tends toward: 

First year — Corn. 

Second year — Corn. 

Third year — Oats (or wheat if previous crop is cut for silage). 

Fourth year — Clover (sometimes mi.xed with timothy and pastured during 5 years). 

Rotations Used by Idaho, Washington, and Oregon Farmers. — A north- 
ern Idaho rotation provides for; 

Beans or peas — 1 year. 
Wheat, oats or barley — 1 year. 

In the irrigated sections of southern Idaho, various rotations are 
practiced, of which the following are samples: 

1. Alfalfa — 4 to 5 years. 
Potatoes — 1 year. 
Beans — ^1 year. 
Spring wheat — 1 year. 

2. Alfalfa — 3 to 5 years. 
Potatoes — 1 year. 

Wheat, oats, or barley — 1 year. 

3. Alfalfa — 3 to 8 years. 

Potatoes — -1 year (sometimes 2 years). 
Sugar beets — 2 to 3 years. 
Grain — 1 year. 

4. Alfalfa — 5 to 7 years. 
Grain — 1 to 2 years. 

Crop production has not resolved itself into any very definite rotations 
in western Washington. On the dry land areas of eastern Washington, 
the amount of rainfall determines the rotation. Where less than 15 in. 
occurs, a common rotation is: 

Grain, usually wheat — 1 year. 
Summer fallow — 1 year. 

Where the rainfall is sufficient to saturate the soil every year the rota- 
tion provides for two crops in 3 years: 

In the Willamette Valley, Oregon use is made of: 

Winter wheat — 1 year. 

Oats, wheat or barley — 1 to 3 years (usually one year). 

Summer fallow — 1 year. 

Grain — 1 year. 

A rotation in the valley soils is: 
1 to 3 years — Clover. 
1 to 2 years — Grain. 

On the Red Hill or clay soils a common rotation is: 

1 year — Winter wheat. 

2 years — Oats. 

1 year — Summer fallow. 



THE SOIL FACTOR 135 

Rotations Used hy California Farmers. — In California, rotations are the 
exception rather than the rule. Specialized crops of fruit, grain, cotton 
and alfalfa, are grown more or less continuously. When a variety of crops 
is grown, rotations do not follow any definite preconceived plan. In dry- 
farmed areas of limited rainfall, summer fallow will alternate with a 
cereal crop; in areas of more abundant rainfall, beans and sugar beets are 
grown in rotations. In irrigated sections a wide variety of crops is 
grown under many different combinations, based largely upon the market 
outlook for sale of crops and the seasonal climatic conditions; where 
alfalfa is grown extensively it is followed by grain or sorghums to benefit 
from the increased fertility; in the peat lands, some attempts are made 
to rotate in various combinations, barley, potatoes, onions, Indian corn, 
hemp, asparagus, and, in the older lands, alfalfa, sugar beets, and beans. 

Rotations Not in Use by Arizona and New Mexico Farmers. — Rotation 
of crops in eastern sections of these states is unknown. The nearest 
approach is the periodical plowing up of alfalfa fields when over-pastured 
or overrun with Bermuda grass and Johnson grass, followed with wheat 
or barley, usually two crops, with often a crop of milo between the two 
grain crops. 

Commercial Fertilizers and Stable Manures Used by Farmers^^ 

Use of Fertilizers in New England. — Much reliance is placed on manure. 
Common rates of application are 12 tons per acre to planted crops, 9 to 
10 tons on grass seeding, and 6 tons on other meadows. 

Commercial fertilizers are used to supplement stable manure on 
annual crops. Acid phosphate is commonly used at rates with manure 
of 200 to 300 lb. for corn and grain. When no manure is applied, 300 to 
400 lb. of a 2 per cent nitrogen and 8 to 10 per cent phosphic acid is used. 
Potatoes receive 500 to 800 lb. of a 2-10-0 fertilizer, together with 
manure. Lime is indispensable. 

Use of Fertilizers in New York. — In the southern New York dairy 
region, manure is spread on meadows or corn stubble. Lime is used at the 
rate of 500 to 2,000 lb. per acre on all cultivated crops except potatoes. 
Corn receives 250 to 300 lb. of a 3-9-2 fertilizer; potatoes and cabbage 
500 to 1,000 lb. of a 2-8-10; oats about 250 lb. of a 2-10-0 mixture. 

In the cereals and live stock region of central New York, straw tends 
to replace any deficiencj^ in manure supplies Lime is applied to acid soils 
fields or when alfalfa is to be grown. Grain, corn, field peas, and beans 
receive 200 lb. of a 2-10-0 fertilizer. Wheat on limestone lands is given 
200 lb. of 14 to 16 per cent acid phosphate. Potatoes and cabbage 
receive 300 to 1,500 lb. of potash. 

Use of ^Fertilizers in Pennsylvania. — In the dairy region of northern 
Pennsylvania, barnyard manure is spread on meadows. Soils deficient 
in lime receive 200 to 2,000 lb. per acre, usually applied to the clover crop 



136 FARM MANAGEMENT 

of the rotation. 200 to 300 lb. of a 2-10-2 fertilizer is used for corn, 
and 500 lb. of a high potash content fertilizer for potatoes. Grain re- 
ceives 200 to 300 lb. of a 2-10-0 formula and occasionally 200 to 300 lb. 
of a 10 to 25 per cent acid phosphate. 

In the general farming districts of southeastern Pennsylvania, if 
applied to corn, an application of 200 or 300 lb. of a 2-8-3 fertilizer 
governs, although for light soil this may be 3-8-4. Oats receive 
very little fertilizer; potatoes 700 to 800 lb. of 3-8-6; wheat, 300 to 
350 lb. of 2-9-3 or 3-8-3, or equal parts of ground bone and 
acid potash; alfalfa, heavy application of lime or limestone, 300 lb. each 
of basic slag and acid phosphate, or 300 lb. of a 3-10-6 fertilizer. 

Use of Fertilizers in New Jersey. — In the white potato section in the 
central part of the state, 1,200 to 2,000 lb. of a 4-8-6 or a 4-8- 
10 formula is given. 

Truck crops of Gloucester County in the more common practice 
receive : 

Early tomatoes 700 lb. per acre of 3-7-5 

Sweet potatoes 900 lb. per acre of 2-8-6 

White potatoes 1 , 500 lb. per acre of 4-8-6 

Cantaloupe 600 lb. per acre of 4-8-6 

Asparagus 2 ,000 lb. per acre of 4-8-10 or 6-7-5 

Peppers 800 lb. per acre of 3-8-6 

Strawberries 500 lb. or more per acre of 5-8-8 

Use of Fertilizers in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia. — In the grazing, 
general farming, and fruit sections of the western parts of Maryland and 
Virginia, fertilizer practices vary greatly. The most general fertilizer 
application is 200 to 300 lb. on wheat of a 2-8-2 or 2-8-3 fer- 
tilizer. Alfalfa, corn, cowpeas, and apples may or may not receive 
fertilizers. If given, the practice varies. 

In the truck, small fruits, peanuts, cotton, and general farming 
sections of Delaware and eastern parts of Maryland and Virignia, corn, 
peanuts, cotton, and small grains usually receive 200 to 400 lb. of a 
2-8-3; cowpeas and clover, 200 to 300 lb. of 14 to 16 per cent acid 
phosphate; potatoes 400 to 1,000 lb. of a 3-6-6 fertilizer; other truck 
crops 300 to 600 lb. of a 3-8-4. 

In the tobacco district of Southern Virginia, 400 to 1,000 lb. of a 
4-8-6 is used on tobacco, while wheat receives 200 to 300 lb. of a 
2-8-2 or a 2-8-3. Corn and other crops sometimes receive 200 
to 300 lb. of 16 per cent acid phosphate. 

Use of Fertilizers in Alabama and Mississippi. — Fertilizer practices are 
extremely varied. Acid phosphate, 100 to 250 lb. per acre, or a mixture 
of equal parts of acid phosphate and cotton seed meal applied at the rate 
of 200 to 400 lb. per acre, or ready mixed fertilizers varying from a 2- 
10-2 to a 4-8-4, are used on corn, cotton, Irish potatoes, sweet potatoes, 
and truck crops. 



THE SOIL FACTOR 137 

In the black prairie belt and Yazoo-Mississippi delta, commercial 
fertilizer is not extensively used. 

Use of Fertilizers in North and South Carolina. — Practice with com- 
mercial fertilizers varies greatly. In the coastal region a common 
practice is to use: 

Cotton, Corn, Oats, 

Acid phosphate 300 lb. 200 lb. 

Cotton seed meal 300 150 

Nitrate of soda 100 100 75 lb. 

In the Piedmont section, the following are typical: 

Cotton, Corn, Oats, 

Acid phosphate 200 lb 200 lb. 

Cotton seed meal 200 100 

Nitrate of soda 75 75 lb. 

Kainit, when available, is used extensivejy in the coastal region and 
slightly in the Piedmont. 

Use of Fertilizers in Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia. — In 
general farming the principal use of commercial fertilizer is acid phosphate 
applied at the rate of 200 to 300 lb. for small grains, 100 to 150 lb. to corn, 
and 300 to 500 lb. to potatoes. 

Use of Fertilizers in Iowa, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio. — Although the 
use of corn fertilizer is increasing, comparatively small quantities are 
used on the average general farm. Corn growers of Illinois are large users 
of acid phosphate, analyzing 2-12-0, 1-8-1; or one of the bone 
meals, varying from 1.6 to 3.7 nitrogen, 20 to 27 phosphoric acid and 
potash, applied in amounts ranging from 150 to 300 lb. per acre. Some 
growers use rock phosphate and lime. On muck lands a fertilizer high 
in potash is required. 

The treating of barnyard manure with acid phosphate, usually at 
about the rate of '40 lb. per ton, is practiced in Ohio, and to some extent 
in Indiana. 

Iowa farmers are not generally users of fertilizer. 

Illinois wheat growers frequently use 80 to 200 lb. of a formula analyz- 
ing from 1.8-8-1 to 1.6-10-2, bone meal of 1.6-2O-0 to 2-28-0. 
Orchardmen use limestone and bone meal or nitrate of soda. The 
dairymen tend to rely on farm manure. 

Use of Fertilizer in Washington and Oregon. — Willamette Valley 
growers use from 50 to 100 lb. of gypsum on clover and alfalfa. Straw- 
berry growers at Kennewisk are users of tankage. In the Willamette 
Valley the use of lime is being greatly extended. In Western Washington, 
potash is used in a limited way. 

The Hood River orchardists, of Oregon, use nitrate of soda, the range 
of use being from 13-^ to 7 lb. per tree, with 2 to 4 lb. as the usual 
practice. 



138 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Use of Fertilizers in California. — For orchards and truck crops manure 
is generally used, but for field crops, its use is not valued particularly- 
high, although an increasing number of trials are being made on grain, 
sugar beets, and on the peat lands of the deltas. The utilization of 
commercial fertilizers is confined to an occasional deciduous orchard and 
to the citrus groves. In the last mentioned practice varies greatly as to 
amount and time of application and kinds; ranging through tankage, 
dried blood, bone meal, ammonium sulphate, and nitrate of soda. A 
type of citrus fertilization in bearing groves is : 

7 lb. bone meal per tree, applied in October. 

2 lb. sodium nitrate per tree, applied in November. 
12 lb. tankage per tree, applied in April. 

5 cu. ft. stable manure per tree, applied in August. 

Locally, gypsum is used in certain alfalfa sections and lime in dis- 
tricts of heavy rainfall. 

Where Use of Fertilizers is not Extensively Practiced. — States where 
farmers make little use of barnyard manure, and practically none of 
commercial fertilizers, are Nebraska, Kansas, the Dakotas, Arizona, 
New Mexico and Washington. 

Green Manure Crops Used by Farmers 

New England. — Inquiry as to the practice of green manuring in 
various parts of New England resulted in findings that the use of green 
manures is not common, although rye, or sometimes a second crop 
clover, is turned under for the benefit of subsequent crops. 

Use of Green Manures by New York Farmers. — Neither in the dairy 
region in the southern part of the State, nor in the cereals and live stock 
region in the central part is green manuring generally practiced. The 
turning under of green crops tends to promote a sour condition. 

Use of Green Manures by Pennsylvania Farmers. — In the dairy region 
of Pennsylvania, the growing of green manure crops is uncommon. The 
short season permits but one crop, and the limited available acreage can 
not be spared for green manures. Weeds are turned under. The natural 
acidity is intensified by green manures. 

Use of Green Manures by New Jersey Farmers. — Green manure crops 
are somewhat common in the sandier lands, use being made of rye, 
buckwheat, and vetch. 

Use of Green Manures by Delaware and Maryland Farmers. — Very 
little green manuring is done in the farming sections of the western parts 
of Maryland and Virginia. In the eastern parts of Maryland and Vir- 
ginia, and in Delaware, where truck, small fruits, peanuts, cotton, and 
general farming are followed, crimson clover is sown at the last working 
of intertilled crops, or else buckwheat, rye or wheat, and cowpeas are 
used for the combined benefits of soil improvement and forage. 



THE SOIL FACTOR 139 

No general practice of green manuring is followed in the tobacco 
districts of Southern Virginia. 

Use of Green Manures by North and South Carolina Farmers. — Green 
manure crops are used but slightly. Some crimson clover is sown 
between the cotton rows in the Piedmont section, to be later turned 
under, and some oats and rye, grown similarly, are occasionally 
found. 

Use of Green Manures by Alabama and Mississippi Farmers. — Green 
manuring is but little practiced. Crops grown for soil improvement 
are usually cut for hay' or grazed off, and only the roots, stubble, and 
similar residues plowed under. Cowpeas and velvet beans are crops most 
commonly utilized. 

Use of Green Manures by Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio Farmers. — 
In some instances, red clover is sown in oats for plowing under, and 
clover for a hay crop or pasture and then plowed under, but on the whole, 
plowing under of green crops is an unusual practice. 

A few farmers sow cowpeas, soy beans, and rape in corn for pasture 
and soil improvement. Orchardmen grow cowpeas, alsike, and some- 
times sweet clover, for green manure crops. 

Use of Green Manures by Kentucky, Tennessee, and West Virginia 
Farmers. — The use of rye and cowpeas, with preference for the former, is 
common in this section. 

Use of Green Manures by Nebraska, Kansas, and Dakota Farmers. — 
Green manures are not commonly grown. 

Use of Green Manures by Washington and Oregon Farmers. — Vetch, 
vetch and rye, or vetch and wheat are used by berry growers of western 
Washington and Oregon. 

In the Wenatchee and Yakima apple districts of Washington, the 
use of alfalfa in the orchards as a combined hay and green manure crop 
is practiced. 

Clover is frequently used as a green manure crop in the apple orchards 
of the Hood River district of Oregon. 

Use of Green Manures by California Farmers. — In general farming, no 
well defined practice is followed of growing crops to plow under. In 
the citrus groves, use is made of bitter clover, vetch or peas, and barley 
or rye, sometimes alfalfa and the usual weed growth. In the deciduous 
orchards, an attempt is made to increase the organic matter by the use 
of heavy weed growths, and sometimes planted crops of peas, and occa- 
sionally alfalfa. Green manuring in field crop production is seldom 
attempted. 

Use of Green Manures by Arizona and New Mexico Farmers. — Reliance 
for increasing organic matter is placed almost entirely upon the roots 
and stubble of alfalfa fields and accompanying weeds. 



140 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Farm Management Findings Concerning Use of Rotation and Manures 

From the farm management standpoint, there are certain findings 
based on farmers' experiences which should be realized in organizing a 
farm business. 

An interesting deduction from a study of what is being done by- 
farmers is the realization of the limited provision for including in farm 
plans a systematic soil-building campaign for several years' duration. 
This is especially interesting when contrasted with the extent of teach- 
ing that this phase of agricultural practice has received. 

In older sections where agriculture is more settled, a principle of 
rotation is to grow two plowed crops, one of which shall be cultivated, 
followed by a legume such as clover or alfalfa. Sometimes accompanying 
the clover is timothy to remain in sod for 2 or 3 years and furnish hay or 
pasture. 

Farmers' experiences seem to show that in areas of deficient rainfall, 
neither commercial fertilizers nor green manures are profitable under 
present-day conditions. 

Attempts to arrive at uniform and standardized methods are more 
common with farmers primarily interested in crop production. Where 
live stock interests predominate, or constitute a large part of the business, 
the necessity of producing feed under seasonable climatic changes and 
fluctuating market conditions, introduces influences tending toward 
unstable, or at least, variable rotation practices. Where crops are the 
chief interest, rotations in common use may be found over a large number 
of farms. In dairy and stock districts, the rotation is more likely to be a 
result of individual needs, and in consequence to be worked out independ- 
ently on the different farms. 

The widespread variation in conditions, interests, and needs prevents 
the formation of a rule of general application. Knowledge of the general 
principles, intelligent recognition of their value, practice in accordance 
with local conditions and findings, must govern. 

Use of Rotation and Manures by Farm Managers 

The farm manager is charged with the responsibility of finding how 
far he can go in planning for the building up of his soil. His concern is 
to provide for this in his particular farming operations, by working out a 
system which takes care of soil improvement to an extent justified by 
his local conditions. 

Theoretically, the organization of the farm to increase or maintain 
productivity should follow certain well-defined principles. Practically, 
the extent that these principles can be incorporated into a given plan 
depends on how closely the operator will adhere to his prearranged plan. 

In actual practice few farmers follow any hard and fast extensive 
rotation through a long series of years. Many farmers believe it is 



THE SOIL FACTOR 141 

impossible to follow such a plan and that it is not advisable to attempt 
it. Certain it is that farmers who are giving careful attention to the 
handling of their fields with a view to definite rotations and soil improve- 
ment are few and far between. An explanation may be found in the 
likelihood of unforeseen possibilities tending to introduce new and unlooked- 
for influences. Changes in the kind or amount of live stock handled, 
failure of certain crops planned for the rotation, delays in getting the 
work done, need for extra hay and grain, fluctuations in market demands 
for crops, necessity for controlling weed, insect, and fungus pests, are 
influencing factors. Another influence is a reluctancy to plow under 
crops of a monetary value. Most farmers will sacrifice larger yields of 
future crops to immediate cash in hand. 



CHAPTER VII 
THE CALENDAR OF OPERATIONS 

Once the plan of work is well thought out, or plans for the season 
definitely made, they should be tested by making out a calendar of opera- 
tions. This calendar or schedule will also be of use in checking up 
activities as the season progresses. 

Definition of the Calendar of Operations. — The calendar of operations, 
or work schedule, is a graphic or tabular presentation showing the kinds 
of farm operations to be performed during the season, and the time limits 
within which the work must be done. 

Value of a Calendar of Operations. — Its value lies in one's learning in 
advance what work is to be done so that needs for implements, work- 
stock, and extra help may be arranged for in time; it helps to eliminate 
lost motion in carrying on operations; it points out the danger of too 
little or too much work coming at one time; it permits a good test of the 
feasibility of working plans and indicates conflicting operations, such as 
corn cutting for silage when alfalfa work is pressing, or bean and corn 
planting, cultivation, and harvest coming at about the same times, or 
grain harvest coming in the height of the planting season for summer 
crops. 

A western grain farmer follows such a program as this: 

December 1 to March 1 Plows 

January 1 to March 1 Seeds and harrows or discs 

June 1 to August 1 Harvests 

August 1 to September 1 Hauls off crop. 

He is therefore idle, so far as his grain crop is concerned, from September 1 to 
December 1, and from March 1 to June 1, or about 5 months out of the year. 

A fruit grower has a more complicated schedule. A western apple grower, for 
instance, irrigates but little; in January or February, he prunes his trees and sprays 
with lime-sulphur; in April he sprays twice, for codling moth; May he thins his 
fruit; March he plows and works down his land into good condition; from April to 
December he cultivates; harvest starts about July 25 and continues to August 15 or 
September 15 to November 1. Even with so many different operations, each takes 
such a short time that a man with 20 acres of orchard, doing personally as much of 
the work as he can, will be idle about 63>-^ months out of the year. 

Manner of Making a Calendar of Operations. — The method of pro- 
cedure in making a calendar of operations is: 

First: List the different industries which make up the farm business. 

142 



THE CALENDAR OF OPERATIONS 143 

Second: List all operations to be done in connection with each indus- 
try, i.e., methods of preparing land, seeding, harvesting, etc., and ways 
of caring for stock. 

Third: Indicate time limits within which the work must be done. 

In working up a calendar of operations the succession of farm oper- 
ations for all crops must be known. 

Example of Kind and Sequence of Farm Operations on Selected Crops 
(Pennsylvania). — For a section in Pennsylvania, the United States De- 
partment of Agriculture finds methods of growing important crops and 
times for the different practices to be:^" 

Wheat 

(1) Plowing. — Cut stubble, soon after harvesting, land allowed to lie fallow until 
about October 1; when wheat follows potatoes or corn the ground is plowed (sometimes 
only disced) immediately after the harvesting of those crops. (2) Rolling or plank- 
ing. — After plowing, sometimes also before seeding. (3) Harrowing. — Majority of 
the farmers use disc followed by spring-tooth or spike- tooth harrow; many use 
spring-tooth harrow only, working two or three times; when disc is used instead of 
plow, the ground is worked four to six times. (4) Seeding. — With drill. (5) Harvest- 
ing. — With 3-horse 6-ft. binder. (6) Hauling. — To stack or mow. (7) Thrashing. — 
Done at barn, occasionally in the field. 

Timothy and Clover 

(1) Manuring. — As top dressing on sod, in fall or winter; on new seeding, in summer. 
(2) Plowing.— Often soon after wheat harvest. (3) Rolling or planking. — After plow- 
ing; sometimes again before seeding. (4) Harrowing. — ^Nearly 50 per cent of the 
farmers use disc, followed by spike-tooth harrow; many use spring-tooth harrow 
only; a few use disc followed by spring- tooth harrow. (5) Liming. — Usually after 
wheat harvest when the land is prepared and seeded in August. (6) Seeding. — 
Timothy is seeded with wheat, and clover the following April; about 23 per cent 
prepare wheat stubble and seed in August. (7) Harvesting. — With 5-ft. mower; 
hay fork is used and hay loader frequently. 

Alfalfa 

(1) Manuring. — About 12 tons per acre as a top dressing or at seeding of previous 
crop. (2) Plowing. (3) Rolling or planking. — Immediately after plowing; again 
between harrowings and often after seeding. (4) Harrowing. — Disc generally 
used twice after plowing. (5) Liming. — With the distributor, except in a few instances. 
(6) Inoculation. (.7) Seeding. — with drill or wheelbarrow seeder, 20 to 25 lb. per 
acre. (8) Cutting. (9) Tedding.— Tedder not always used when followed by side- 
delivery rake. (10) Raking. — Side-delivery rake generally used; some of the smaller 
farms use a dump rake. (11) Cocking. — -Immediately after raking when the hay is to 
be protected with hay caps; in this case hay stands in cock for 1 to 3 days and is 
opened up 2 hr. before hauling. (12) Hauling. — Where a loader is used the hay is 
picked up from the windrow. (13) Top dressing. — Manure sometimes applied in 
fall; fertilizer in early spring or immediately after first or second cutting. (14) 
Harrowing. — Disc or special sharp-pointed spring-tooth harrow often used after cut- 
ting, to eradicate blue grass and weeds. 



144 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Example of Kind and Sequence of Farm Operations in Producing 
Alfalfa (California). — The commercial practice for California produced 
alfalfa rests upon well defined requirements and operations, as shown in 
the following outline. 

Alfalfa 

Time to Maturity. — 1 year, first cutting 3 to 6 months from planting. 
Life. — 12 years (range 2 to 40 years). 
Calendar o/ Operations. 

Seeded. — Seed tested for germination and purity (especially for dodder). 
Varieties. — Common (Chili) most generally grown. 
Time. — Fall — October or November, or spring — January 15 to May, timed to escape 

severe frosts or hot weather during germination and early stage. 
Quantity Seed.— 18 lb. (range 10 to 20 lb). 

Majority of seeding done during February and March. Nurse crop usually omitted. 
Method and Distance. — Broadcasted, harrowed, dragged, or brushed in. Some- 
times drilled. 
Irrigation. — After well established, irrigated once or twice, depending upon the 
soil, with 2 to 6 acre inches of water between cuttings, April to October; irrigated 
thoroughly one time in winter (December or January) if soil is retentive or rain- 
fall light. 
Harvest. 

When. — WTien Ko in bloom or when new shoots are 4 or 5 in. tall. Usually every 

4-6 weeks, beginning April 15, until December 1. 
How. — Mowed, raked, shocked, stacked, baled. Raked in windrows 2 hr. to 
2 days after cutting — put in cocks as soon as possible after raking; cured for 2 to 
10 days in cocks. Then baled from field or else stacked in field. Sometimes 
baled from stacks. 
Yield for Season per Acre. 
First year. 

Good — 2}4 tons. 
Usual — -IJ^^ tons. 
After Maturing. 
Good — 8 tons. 
Usual — 5 tons. 

Example of Kind and Sequence of Farm Operations in Producing 
Peaches (California). — A fruit crop has its own requirements in the way 
of cultural operations. 

Setting Out and Caring for Orchards to Maturity. 

Distance Apart of Trees 20 X 20 ft. to 24 X 24 ft. 

Average Number per Acre 75 to 108: 100 average 

Time of Planting Out December-March 

Age to Self-sustaining Crop 5 years 

Age to Maturity 8 years 

Length of Profitable Life Estimated 20 years or longer 

Most Popular Varieties. 

Shipping Peaches. — Alexander, Triumph, Hales's Early, Yellow St. John, Straw- 
berry, Crawford's Early, Crawford's Late, Elberta, and Salway. 

Drying Peaches. — Lovell and Muir. 

Canning Peaches. — Tuskena (Tuscan Cling), Phillips' Cling, Lemon Clingstone, 
Orange Clingstone, and MeKevitt's Cling. 



THE CALENDAR OF OPERATIONS 145 

Calendar of Operations. 

Irrigation. — If given, twice by furrows or checks, June to October or November. 

Prunning. — Pruned annually. 

Fertilizing. — Cover crops for soils lacking in body. Usually intercropped. 

Spraying. — ^November-December, Bordeaux. February — with lime sulphur, 

trunks whitewashed and protected from rabbits, during second year. 

Cultivation. — Plowed and cross plowed in February and March (sometimes fall 

plowed in October or November) ; harrowed twice, cultivated at frequent intervals 

from April to October. 

Companion Cropping. — Intercropped to berries, small fruits, grain, beans, beets, 

corn, and sometimes alfalfa. Usually discontinued after trees are 3 or 4 years old. 

Caring for Bearing Orchards. 

Calendar of Operations. 

Irrigation. — If given, twice by furrows, June and October. 

Pruning. — December-February. Pruned to open up head, thin out wood, and 

shorten growth. 

Fertilizing. — -Cover crops grown when soil lacks body. 

Cultivation. — February-March, plowed and cross plowed (sometimes fall plowed) 

— October or November crop cultivated at frequent intervals from March to 

November. Worked down into good condition. 

Fumigating. — None. 

Thinning Fruit. — Thinned to leave one peach every 4 to 6 in. apart. Thinned 

as early as possible (April). 

Spraying. — February— Given lime sulphur when buds are swelling. Borers when 

present are removed from trunks once a year. 

November — Given Bordeaux if blight is present. 

Harvest. 

Time. — July-September. 

Method. — Picked by hand, or shaken off if for drying. Trees gone over two to 

five times. 

Preparing for Market. 

Green. — Packed in 20-lb. crates or 25-lb. baskets. 

Dried. — Cut in half, pitted, sulphured, dried in sun on trays. Dry 4 or 5 to 1. 

Canning. — Delivered in lug boxes. 

Yields. 

Canning Dried ob 

fruit, tons shipping, tons 

Good 8 1.5 

Usual .'... 6 1.0 

Influence of Available Work Days. — An estimate of available days 
when men and teams can work in the fields is essential. The total 
depends on the month and the rainfall, and varies over a considerable 
range. The following tables are illustrative. 

Work Days in Arkansas. — Number of work days in Arkansas ^^ has 
been shown to be: 

Table 40. — Available Work Days in Kansas 

January 10 July 20 

February 10 August 20 

March 15 September 20 

April 18 October 20 

May 20 November 15 

June 20 December 12 

10 



146 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Work Days in Utah. — The number of days available for farm work is 
shown by Connor from his Utah study^" to be: 

Table 41. — Available Work Days in Utah 

Total Available 

number dats number days 

November 1 to December 1 30 20 

December 1 to March 1 96 46 

March 1 to May 1 60 35 

May 1 to July 1 61 42 

July 1 to September 1 62 50 

September 1 to November 1 61 42 

An average of 73 per cent. 

Work Days in Pennsylvania.— Billings for Chester County, Pennsyl- 
vania,*" gives the available days as: 

Table 42. — Available Work Days in Pennsylvania for Field Work and 

Hours in Work Day 

Data Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 

Days available 3 3 10 16 19 21 22 22 21 17 14 6 

Hours in work day. 778999 10 99988 

This gives the number of days (exclusive of rainy'days and Sundays) 
available for the several field operations. 

Graphic Presentations of Calendar of Operations. — Many different 
ways of presenting Calendars of Operations are in use. The illustrations 
which follow are typical and can be studied to advantage for clearness of 
detail, simplicity, ease in analyzing, etc. 

The Chart System of Making Calendars of Operations. — One plan pro- 
vides for dividing each month into three periods, the first and second 
periods being 10 days each and the third the remainder of the month, 
which will make the third period 8, 10, or 11 days according to the length 
of the month. A chart is then made having the dates in the left-hand 
column and the various crops or other enterprises for the headings of 
the remaining columns. Under each heading is inserted in each 10- 
day period the work to be done on a particular enterprise during that 
period. It will, of course, not be possible, on account of the vagaries of 
the weather, to follow such a schedule blindly, but at the same time the 
schedule will be of great service in keeping track of the farm work. It 
is especially helpful as a means of foreseeing what equipment as well as 
what teams and men will be needed at particular times. This enables 
the manager to be prepared for work at the time it should be done. 

Example of Chart System of a Calendar of Operations. — An example of 
the chart system of scheduling operations is taken from Utah Bulletin 
165.3" 



THE CALENDAR OF OPERATIONS 



147 



Table 43. — A Calendar of Operations Made after the Chart System 
Covering Grain, Raspberries, Peaches, and Tomatoes^" 

Small Grain 



Operations 


Period 


Days 


In period 


Available for 
field work 


Clean ditches 

Fit 

Sow 

Harrow 


Mar. 1-May 1 
Mar. 1-May 1 
Mar. 1-May 1 
Mar. 1-May 1 
Mar. 1-May 1 
May 1-July 1 
July 1-Sept. 1 
July 1-Sept. 1 
July 1-Sept. 1 
July 1-Sept. 1 
Nov. 1-Dec. 1 


61 

61 
62 

30 


35 


Irrigate 

Cut 

Shock 

Stack 

Thrash 

Plow 


42 
50 

20 



Raspberries 



Manure 

Clean ditches 

Prune and thin 

Cultivate 

Hoe 

Irrigate 

Weed 

Haul and make crates. 

Pick, haul, etc 

Irrigate 




46 
35 



Peaches 



Clean ditches 

Prune 

Haul brush 

Spray 

Plow 

Spray 

Cultivate 

Irrigate 

Cultivate 

Irrigate 

Haul and make cases 
Pick, pack, haul, etc. 
Plow 



Mar. 
Mar. 
Mar. 
Mar. 
Mar. 
May 
May 
May 
July 
July 
July 
Sept. 
Nov. 



1-May 1 
1-May 1 
1-May 1 
1-May 1 
1-May 1 
1-JuIy 1 
1-July 1 
1-July 1 
1-Sept. 1 
1-Sept. 1 
1-Sept. 1 
1-Nov. 1 
1-Dec. 1 




35 



42 
50 



42 
20 



Tomatoes 



Manure 

Clean ditches 

Hot bed 

Cold frame 

Weed and water frames 

Fit 

Fit 

Weed and water frames 

Furrow 

Transplant 

Reset 

Cultivate 

Irrigate 

Hoe 

Cultivate 

Irrigate 

Hoe 

Weed 

Harvest and haul one-half crop 
Harvest and haul one-half crop 
Plow 



Winter 
Mar. 1- 
Mar. 1- 
Mar. 1- 
Mar. 1- 
Mar. 1- 
May 1- 
May 1- 
May 1- 
May 1- 
May 1- 
May 1- 
May 1- 
May 1- 
July 1- 
July 1- 
July 1- 
July 1- 
July 1- 
Sept. 1- 
Nov. 1- 



■May 
■May 
May 
May 
May 
July 
July 
July 
July 
July 
July 
July 
July 
Sept 
Sept 
Sept 
Sept 
Sept 
Nov 
Dec. 




46 
35 



42 



42 
20 



The Line System of Making Calendars of Operations. — The following 
form of presenting is used by the Federal Office of Farm Management in 



148 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



its farm economics presentation/^ It illustrates the line system of 
recording farm operations in a graphic manner. 

Table 44. — A Caxendar of Operations Made after the Line System 
(Chester County, Pennsylvania) 



CROPS 



CORN 



POTATOES 



OATS 



WHEAT 



CLOVER 
8a 

TIMOTHY 



ALFALFA 



JAN 



FEa MAR APR. MAY JUN 



JUL. 



^ MANURE cul tivate ; 

R OLL I 

DISC HARROW 
SPR I N6 TOOT H^ HARROW 
SPIRE TOOTH HARRO W acWEEO 
DRILL FERTILIZER! 
PLANT ' 



CULTIVATE 



PLOW 

HOLL 

DISC HARROW 

SPRING TOOT H HARROW 

Ia«aa«i^s«Ba , 
PLANT I 

SPIKE TOOTH HARROW 



I 



_ROLL^' 
HARROW 



SEED 



CLOVER 



AUG. 



SCR 



OCT 



MA NURE 

■ •mi 

CUT 



NOV 



oca 



PLOW 



— tm*> 

HAUL GRAIN 
HAUL STALKS 



DIG 

PICK UP & BAG 
HAUL fc STORE 



SHOcV 
HAyLTO^BARN 

THRESH 



P L^OW 



COT &SHOCK 



HAULTg,BARN 



_ROLL 

DISC HARRO W 
SPR. OR SPI jSE^TOOTH HARRT* 
SEED 



i 



MANURE 



PLOW 

ha rves t't" 
disc harr ow 
spring or spike. tooth harrow 

ME 
SEED 



MANURE. MANURE-^ 

PLOW^ 

0«SC har row' a . ROLL 

LIME 

SPRING OR SPIKE TOOTTH HARROW 

FERTILIZER. INq<iyUVf^8t3EEO 

HARVEST J^£UT. 2 CUT. 3 CUT 



The full line represents the period when most farmers perform their farm operations, and the dotted 
line gives the range within which these operations may be performed. 



THE CALENDAR OF OPERATIONS 



149 



a. 






>^ 



o 



SPRING WHEAT REGION 
SEASONAL DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL LABOR 

ON A 

600 ACRE GRAIN FARM 

NORTH DAKOTA 


HOURS 
500 
400 
300 
200 
100 


HOURS 
800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 


z 
z 

s 

2 O 


<-> 2 
Q 2 










■ 


























■ 


























■ 


















> S 










i 














































ir^ 1 1 


























^^ 2 






















— 1 


■ilHTTri 








~VI 


If 










I^^Hs ti 








"■ 






U 




2 O 


D. ° 
Ul O 
U) - 








"■ 








— ^ 








~^1 








^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H ki CL 1 








I^^^^H 








^H 




2 K 


*5 2 
3 o 

a - 




J 












TT-^ 






^^M 




m^^i 


■^■^^l 






\ 


^^^^^H ^ 












- « 


=> 2 








^ 


■ 








^ 








-^-^ 






















1 


^^fi::: 1 








1 


111 










1^1 


■i 




- ;^ 


-• 




















i ■ 


o U 






















1 
























■d == :^ 


X 2 








fl 














^^■^^^^^^^1 . . • 1 










1 










fli 




- I 


« 2 
S 2 






\ 


-O- 

m 

<t 

-Ul- 

-in- 
_o:_ 
.o_ 

X 




^^I^^Hi~ 


TT^ 


















(E 






- * 


0= 2 
< 2 

I - 




o 




0-5H 



























^|3l| 
























"> ° 


























2 ID 
o U 
- b. 




< 












































1 ~ 




z 






















2 z 
2 * 

X 
z 
o 

s 




























"• " 




























HOURS 
500 

400 
300 
200 

too 


HOURS 
800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 



o 
a 
Q 

-fi -d 
o ■£ 

o3 ^ 



-. OJ (U 



o ^ 



o 


-rt 




03 


c3 


t- 










0) 


a 








crt 






OJ 


C 




c3 



fe 



'^ O 



CO o 

.^ o 






U 

m 

z 



U (0 
5 

<x 
z 
o 

(0 



J 

i 

o 

H 
b. 
O 

s 



< 



o 

Z w 

<^ 

O o 
O <" 

u 
q: 
u 
< 

o 

N 



Q. -^2 



HOURS 

aoo 

700 
600 
500 
400 
300 
200 

loo 


HOURS 

700 
600 
500 
400 
300 
200 

too 


X 

1 

z 












1 1 


H 










m 


O (j 












1 




.. 




SIN 






1 












T 


I^^^B 












■1 


■bdiH 


2 o 


> 2 












■ ■[ti 












n 


P 
















^^1 ^? 












1 


ii 












1 














O 2 












II 


lu 


























^,in. 












ij 


■ 


2^ 












_J 


1«3H« out 




■ 




0. 2 

111 o 

« - 












■ ^^ 


>l»03 lS3A»»Hj 






h^ 












ll 


BH 


LaJMOi'M-"" 




1 












1 ■ 




H9l]lld1IH Mi^^^^^^^l 


O 2 
5° 












■ 


■^^^^1 •..-■ 


tTH^HI^I^^^hh^^^h^^h 


2 <5 
2? 












\^^^^^m nOi Moid « 501 


3«in3 I n 










j^ 






U.OHS3.KM 


■^^^■ri 


5 2 

3 o 








iH 


a.,„-« .m 


l^fi^^^^^^^^^^B 


o 5 










3N<mH ^^^^^^^ 


■ 


2 ^ 








1 


INM AUV^^H^^^^^^H 




Z ° 
3 o 










-.1 1 1 II 




O u 










Z^H^ 


^^V 




2 3 










^^n 


>■ 2 
I 2 












o > 














2 E 










■ 


11 










gj 


^^^1 


mr^^mi 
















^ 


kl«03IS 








o 0- 










1 


■^■l^^i 


r^ 


.Qi. 
O 












- < 


a o 

Si 




o 












i^ g 












1 


2 o: 




01 










ic 




m 












o < 




< 














< 










1 


- z 


» 2 
u. 2 
















J 




~^ 










Jl 






z 














u 












1 


? !:: 
















3 




(n 












z 2 

< o 
















l» 














— 1 


2 z 

o < 


















^ 








































!■ 


i ' 

o , 


> t 

5 C 

9 f 


> < 

5 < 


3 t 
3 C 

P U 


> c 


> e 

> c 
r r 


> C 

> C 
I r 


> c 

> c 

4 p 


> 


E 

3 
O 

E 


c 
<: 

t 


3 c 

3 C 

» « 


> <: 

> c 
» u 


> c 
1 ^ 


> e 
r r 


> « 

1 C 




> 

> 


1 

s 



03 






a 


rM 






(H 


C 




^ 


r/1 






n 




o 


d 


-fj 


— 1 


en 


*— I 






0) 


fl 


a 


d 



a a 



w 



CO 2 



Ph 



150 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



COTTON BELT 
SEASONAL DISTRIBUTION OF FIELD LABOR 

ON A 

I60 ACRE FARM 

BLACK WAXY PRAIRIE OF TEXAS 


HOURS 
900 
800 
700 
600 
500 
400 
300 
200 
100 


JAN 

10 20 


FEB. 

10 20 


MAR 

10 20 


APR 

10 20 


MAY 

10 20 


JUNE JULY 

10 20 10 20 


AUG. 

1020 


SEPT 
10 20 


OCT 

1020 


NOV 

1020 


DEC 

10 20 


HOURS 
900 
800 
700 
600 
500 
400 
300 
200 






















PREP'NS S 
PLANTING 


CULTlVC COTTON 
AMD CORN 






PICKING 
COTTOI« 








PLOW- 
INC 


















































m 
























































































1 


A. 


[t 




L 


A 


}( 


Jl 


1 




















































































































































































































L 














- 




■ 
















































1 


1 
















■ 


1 










■ 






1 


■■ 








■ 


1 " 1 










^ 








^^^^ 


HOURS 
500 

400 

300 

200 

100 




















PREPNG LANO 
a PIANTINS 


CULTIl^ATJNG 
1 1 1 r 1 


























PLOW 

asEO 


HOURS 




























1 








































■■ 




MUl 


.E LABOR 








■ 


J 








































H 300 
H 200 






















iL 




d 








































































































too 










r. 






1 




■nil— 


HI 




" ■ 




10 20 
MONTH j^„ 


1020 
FEB 


10 20 
MAR. 


10 20 
APR. 


10 20 
MAY 


10 20 
JUNE 


10 20 

JULY 


10 20 
AUG 


10 20 
SEPT 


10 20 
OCT. 


10 20 
NOV 


10 20 

DEC. "O"^" 



Fig. 25. — A calendar of operations on a cotton farm, made after the block method. 



The Calendar of Operations in Connection with Continuous Feed for 
Live Stock. — In outlining farming methods to insure continuous grazing 
for hogs of the southeastern states, Haskell furnishes a good illustration 
of the use. of a calendar of operations in planning crops to insure feed.'* 

The account of the farm selected from those reported, shows that it contained 100 
acres, of which 84 acres were planted to crops, 4 acres in Bermuda pasture, with 
the remaining 12 acres in woods, roads, and other nonproductive land. The soil, a 
sandy loam, was fairly representative of the region, and it had been brought to a high 
state of productivity by the system of grazing followed. 

Twenty sows and two boars, all pure-bred, were kept on this farm; 160 pigs were 
sold and 12 were slaughtered at home, the average weight of all being 225 lb. or a total 
of 38,700 lb. of live pork produced. 

The crops and acreages used for grazing and the periods during which each were 
grazed are shown in the table. Five and two-tenths hogs per acre were maintained 
or produced on this farm. The acreages in oats cut for grain, and in oats, rye, and 
rape pastures, produced a crop of hay in addition to the grain and grazing. The 40 
acres planted to corn, peanuts, and velvet beans are counted as 20 acres of grazing 
crops, since the corn was harvested before the hogs were turned in. 



THE CALENDAR OF OPERATIONS 



151 



Table 46. — The Calendar of Operations as a Means of Showing a Grazing 
Scheme in Operation on a Given Farm, Georgia 



Crops 


A ores 

of 
Crops 


Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 


Oats for grain (a) . . . . 


11 

4 
2 
4 
3 
10 

10 
20 




Oats and rye, pasture 




Rape 




Bermuda pasture 




Cattail millet 




Early corn and cow- . 




peas 

Early corn and Span- 








North Carolina pea- 
nuts and velvet 













(o) Grown primarily as a grain crop. 

(6) Interplanted with 40 acres of corn, the latter being harvested, 
fore are treated as 20 acres of grazing crops. 



The peanuts and beans there- 



CHAPTER VIII 
CHOICE OF FARM EQUIPMENT 

The extent, variety, and nature of the equipment will be determined 
by the kind of enterprise, the working conditions, and, where choice is 
possible, by the tastes and financial resources of the operator. 

It is merely sound business policy to tie up in implements, work 
stock, buildings, and other equipment, the least amount of money con- 
sistent with the work to be done. 

The beginner is especially liable to pay out too large a proportion of 
funds in equipment, or to sacrifice economy to ideals of construction or 
to building up an over-elaborate plant. This is particularly true with 
respect to buildings. It should be borne in mind that buildings are not 
direct producers of wealth, but rather aids to production. Under most 
conditions building construction should proceed but slowly. Erection 
of buildings should be postponed until actual need arises for their use. 
Construction of milking barns may well be put off until new alfalfa plant- 
ings, for the use of the herd, are matured enough to warrant the purchase 
of the herd ; purchase of ladders, drying trays, lug boxes, sprayers, or 
building of packing sheds necessary for older orchards but not needed for 
newly set fruit plantings can well be postponed until a need has developed. 
Sometimes early purchasing results in enough substantial savings to 
warrant the practice, but usually to postpone purchases until actually 
needed means a reduction from over-equipment and capital waste. 

Temporary buildings or less expensive implements will often serve. 
Examples are, use of wood instead of concrete when the future of the 
structure may be in doubt, as in starting a new dairy business and erecting 
a silo; use of straw-thatched shelters for stock; use of canvas for wood. 

Factors Governing Selection. — Six factors will ordinarily govern 
selection of equipment. These are : crops, soils, size of outfit, amount of 
capital, personal choice, local custom. 

Examples of Factors Governing Selection. — Illustrations of how choice of equip- 
ment depends upon one or more of the six factors listed above can be found on every 
hand. 

Character of Crops. — The influence of the character of the crop on the kind of 
equipment is seen at once upon comparing the equipment selected for putting in and 
caring for grain — such as gang plows, spike tooth harrows, disc harrows, drills or 
broadcasters, combined harvesters, binders or headers and stationary thrashers — 
with, for instance, the tools of the fruit business; viz., walking plow.s or single or double 
gang plows, corrugated rollers, spring tooth harrows, spike tooth harrows, spraying 

152 



CHOICE OF FARM EQUIPMENT 153 

outfits, trays, lug boxes, picking baskets, ladders, etc. In the same way crops planted 
by broadcasting with no subsequent cultivation differ from row planted crops with 
cultivation following. 

Character of Soils. — Heavier equipment is necessary for soils of gumbo, adobe, or 
heavy clay texture in contrast with that for light, sandy, or friable soils. In other 
words, differences of soil type influence profoundly the selection of plows, harrows, 
cultivators, and similar equipment. Again, where topography is reflected in equip- 
ment witness the side hill plow for rolhng conditions as against the non-reversible 
mold board plow of the flat lands. 

Size of Outfit. — Size of outfit refers to equiprdent necessary for the two- to four- 
horse farm as contrasted with farms working six, eight, and ten animals in a 
team. Tractors are possible for use on farms of comparatively large scale, while 
horses must be the rule for small-sized enterprises. 

Amount of Capital. — Amount of capital when limited may necessitate securing of 
second-hand equipment rather than new, and smaller equipment such as two-horse 
outfits rather than six-horse. 

Personal Choice. — Where choice is possible, personal taste justifies the selection of 
a certain type of rake, seeder, harrow, or cultivator; the selection of a disc instead of a 
mold board plow; or a leaning toward a given make of tractor. 

Local Customs. — Local customs will influence the selection of equipment. It is 
usually better to give workmen the equipment with which they are familiar rather 
than to attempt the installation of new methods locally untried. This is illustrated 
by the retention in certain communities of hand pitching, and wagon hauling of hay 
to stacks, as against the use elsewhere of buck rakes or hay slings. Hay loaders and 
side delivery rakes and walking cultivators illustrate types of equipment which often 
find local favor but are not generally in use. 

Environment a Factor in Determining Equipment. — There are some- 
times, perhaps often, reasons for local practices. Consider, for example, the 
stone walls found all over New England, where rock is so abundant that 
fences, buildings, and field clearing can best proceed in conjunction; the 
split rail fence of timbered countries where timber is cheap and conven- 
ient; the wire fence of the. open plains where building material is scarce 
and costly; the mule of the south, the ox-team still occasionally found in 
Maine, the heavy draft horse of adobe lands, the one-horse equipment 
of the southern one-man cotton farm; the grain "combines" of the north- 
west requiring 26 to 32 horses to draw (or equal tractor power) ; the grain 
sack of the Pacific Coast; the grain elevator of the Middle West; sleds in 
snow countries; wide-tread wagon wheels for muddy lands. The point is 
first to know local needs and local practices, and then to expand this 
knowledge by means of observation and study of other and perhaps better 
types of equipment used elsewhere under similar conditions. 

Some choices are due to habit, to former association, or to demand 
and supply, but conditions such as these are easily recognized, e.g., use 
of abode in hot countries with little wood, blinds on eastern houses, steep- 
pitched roofs in snow countries vs. quarter-pitch roofs in countries of 
limited rainfall. In sections of scant rainfall, hay is stacked in the open, 
in localities of heavy snow or much rain inside storage facilities must be 



154 FARM MANAGEMENT 

provided. Icehouses are a part of the building equipment in states of 
cold winters and warm summers; water towers, tanks, and windmills are 
necessary in countries needing water storage facilities for stock, domestic, 
and irrigation uses. The availability and kind of building materials 
will have a material influence on the type of building. Use of easily 
available materials should rule. This means use of rock or concrete or 
lumber or even adobe according to the resources of the community. 

Grouping of Items. — A full list of all equipment needs should be made up for a 
specific enterprise. 

For convenience the various items may well be grouped under general headings, as : 

Farm Business. 
Buildings. 
Fences. 

Implements and machinery. 

Motive power — work stock, tractor, truck, automobile. 
Live stock other than work stock. 
Small tools. 
Special equipment, as for 

Dairy house. 

Poultry plant. 
Irrigating facilities. 
Draining facilities. 
Domestic water supply including piping for 

House. 

Stock. 
Sewage disposal. 

Personal. ' 

Household furnishings. 

Automobile. 
A further classification can be made by re-segregating these items into 

Investment equipment < ^ ^ r j. i i. 

^ [ Improvements, as fences, water supply, etc. 

[ Implements and machinery 

^ , . . ^ Live stock 

Operatmg equipment < , , ,. 
^ o -I r- Motive power 

[ Tools. 

Personal equipment Household goods. 

Experience Necessary. — A little practical experience in using different 
kinds of implements under the direction of a competent man will prove 
the quickest way to learn what implements should be included in a list 
of equipment. 

Where one can not bring personal experience to bear, a list should be 
made up based on the recommendations of those who have had this 
experience and can give proper advice. 



CHOICE OF FARM EQUIPMENT 155 

Justifying Equipment 

In the purchase of equipment, the expenditure of money in every case 
should be justified by an investigation into the costs and savings as 
measured by business principles. 

The following examples will indicate the line of reasoning which 
should be followed. In every case they take into account the charges 
of interest, depreciation, and repairs, and place these against the pos- 
sible saving in time or labor, or the possible gain in efficiency. 

Justifying Farm Buildings. — One man builds a plain, dignified, 
serviceable set of buildings costing $1,200. Another, perhaps a student of 
architecture, puts up a set of buildings more finished, but for farm pur- 
poses no more beautiful, dignified, or serviceable, at a cost of $6,000. 

Interest at 6 per cent on average value, plus depreciation at 5 per cent 
and repairs at respectively 2 and 1 per cent, totals 

First case $120 

Second case $540 

If these buildings are each on 40 acres of similar land, each acre of 
land, to carry its share of the building investment, must produce above 
operating costs $13.50 per acre in the second case, as against but $3.00 
in the first case. 

Justif3dng Individual Structure.— In many sections, under normal con- 
ditions, a good single walled hog house can be built at a cost of from $30 
to $40 a pen. If the cost is $35 per pen and each is used to raise four 
litters a year, the cost per litter will amount to 

Interest on $17.50 at 5 per cent : . . . . $0. 88 

Repairs on $35.00 at 2 per cent 0.70 

Depreciation on $35.00 at 5 per cent 1 . 75 



$3.33 
or an average cost of 83^ per litter. 

Compare this house with a hog house, ideal in every respect except 
cost, such as can be found occasionally. One in the writer's mind 
consists of 18 pens, feed bins, and fixtures. It cost $4,000 completed, 
or $222 a pen. Its financial aspect is therefore : 

Interest, $111* at 5 per cent $ 5.55 

Repairs, $222 at 2 per cent 4 . 44 

Depreciation, $222 at 5 per cent 11 . 10 

$21.09 

or a cost per litter of $5.27 as against 83^ for the other house. 
* Upon average investment. 



156 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Justifying Implement. — 

A manure spreader costs $120 . 00 

The upkeep cost is 2 . 50 annually 

An old wagon which would answer the purpose, 

we will say is worth 40 . 00 

Its upkeep is 1 . 00 

Hauling done semi-occasionally. 
Loading time equal. 
Unloading. 

Spreader = 6 min. 

Wagon = 24 min. 

Time of man and team valued at 40^ per hour. Machinery charges 
involve interest, depreciation, and upkeep costs. These figure: 

For spreader (10 years of life) $18 . 00 

For wagon (5 years of life) 10 . 00 

thus giving an apparent saving of $8 by wagon. This, however, is offset 
by longer time required for unloading to an extent determined by the 
tonnage of manure to be spread, thus: 

Saving by spreadeb 
Tonnage (1-ton load), hours Value of saving 

25 7}4 $ 3.00 

50 15 6.00 

75 22>^ 9.00 

100 30 12.00 

Hence for 75 tons or more the saving is sufficient in this instance so that 
a manure spreader, if money can be spared for its purchase without affect- 
ing more important capital needs, is justified. For less than 75 tons, the 
wagon is cheaper. 

Justifying Special Equipment. — Justifying special equipment is illus- 
trated by use of milking machines and corn binder. 

Milking Machine. Based. on 120 milking cows the data for a given 
dairy showed that with hand milking one man could milk 30 cows, at a 
monthly wage of $60 and board— the latter worth $20. By machine milk- 
ing one man could handle 60 cows if paid a monthly wage of $75 and 
board. The cost of outfit installed amounted to $600 for two double 
unit machines. Comparison necessitates consideration of: 

Interest on outfit. 

Depreciation of outfit. 

Repairs of outfit, e.g., new tubing, cups, etc. 

Gasoline, oil, and operating expense. 

Any spoiling of cows. 

Extra labor to care for machines. 



Hence : 



CHOICE OF FARM EQUIPMENT 157 



Depreciation 25 per cent on $600 $ 150 

Interest at 6 per cent on $300* 18 

Repairs (estimated) 40 

Operating machine, fuel, oil, etc., 6 hr. day at $0.10 per hour. . . 219 
Extra labor (1 hr. per machine per day, 730 hr. at $0.25). . . . 183 

2 operators at $1,140 2,280 



$2,890 

Cost of hand milking, 4 men at $960 $3 ,840 

In favor of machine $ 950 

Investigations by the U. S. D. A.''^ covering the labor requirements of 
dairy farms as influenced by milking machines tended, when the data 
were taken, to show that for dairies having less than 30 cows, hand- 
milking was cheaper; for dairies having more than 30 cows, machine 
milking was more economical. Against the saving in time per cow by 
machine milking (about 43>^^ min. being required by machine, nearly 7 
min. by hand), were considered interest on investment, fuel and oil, 
repairs, depreciation, and labor on the machine. Summed up with labor 
at but $0,123 per hour, the findings are: 



Size op herd 


Machine milking 


H 


AND MILKING 


15 cows or less 


$11.77 
10.14 




$10 91 


16 to 30 cows 


10.26 


3 1 to 50 cows 


9.22 




10.11 


51 cows or more 


7.34 




10.45 



J iCstifijing Corn Binder vs. Hand Cutting for Silage Corn. — On a given 
farm the cost of a corn binder was found to be $285. Acreage was 8 
acres of corn grown for silage. 

Use of machine. 

Interest at 6 per cent on $142.50 $ 8 . 55 

Depreciation at 10 per cent on $285 28 . 50 

Twine, 8 balls at $0.75 6 . 00 

Repairs, estimated on 10 years life 5 . 00 

Total $48 . 05 

Labor with machine. 

Cutting, 4 horses at $1, one man at $3.50, 3 days $ 22.50 

Loading, two men at $3.50, 6 days 42 . 00 

Total for machine, including interest, depreciation, etc $112.55 

All hand labor. 

Cutting and loading, eight men at $3.50 for 6 days 168.00 

Comparison of costs per acre. 

By machine $ 6 . 25 

By hand $ 9.22 

* On average investment. 



158 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Justifying Tractors. — A gasoline tractor to replace horse stock, must 
cover the depreciation, interest on the investment, labor, fuel, and 
repairs. 

There are a large number of combinations under which engines can be 
considered to replace horses, but the final consideration is the amount of 
work to be done. In this example work which can be done by either 
horses or tractor is equivalent to 10 work animals. Only the work stock 
which can be actually replaced are taken into account. 

Table 47. — Testing Tractor vs. Horses for Given Farm in Determining 

Equipment Needs 

(1919 data) 

Number of days work Two plow unit 

75 6 HORSES 22-Hp. tractor 

On home place 

First value — motive power 

Six horses at $150 $ 900 

Harness and collars 112 

Tractor $1 , 100 

Total $1 , 112 $1 , 100 

Annual expense 

Feed, or fuel and oil $ 467 $ 280 

Labor in field 375 450 

Labor when not working 60 50 

Repairs and incidentals 30 186 

Total operating expense $ 932 $ 966 

Overhead 

f 12 per cent on work stock $ 108 

Depreciation I 20 per cent on harness 22 

[ $1,100 -^ 400 work days (life) X 75 days $ 225 

Interest at 6 per cent on average investment 33 36 

Total overhead charge $ 163 $ 261 

Total operation and overhead $1 ,095 $1 ,227 

Credits 

Profit on outside work . $ 60 $ 100 

Manure $ 20 

Colts (at time of weaning) 40 

Total credit $ 120 100 

Final net cost $ 975 $1 , 127 

Cost per day (about) $ 13 $ 15 

Tractor Equipment. — To the above items may well be added the addi- 
tional capital requirements, with attending charges of interest and depre- 
ciation, for any difference in equipment involved in the working of either 



CHOICE OF FARM EQUIPMENT 



159 



t' 










!•• 






^ 




: 


: 


-J»B^ J 




iti 


itet^*"^ *5i'"T 


2^'~''l''' 'ri' f 


HK -J^" 1 


Sas;:.: *^^ 


P^i^^ 








g| 


SiBl^liivMi 


■ ■K^ ••«£,'_ ?^^ 


p^ 


SM 




!^^^ 




IB 


^ .^.-■-,',^^^ 


'Cm ' ' '^-'•*'2^i?s3""- ' " 


■ijii 


^m 


i^L.. .. 




MUHBHBma 


■ii#^-rJl^ 


^"Eg 



Fig. 26. 





1 

■ 






PBH 


1 


K 


te^ 




|ftg*:jjg #^/ i 


^^Mm^^^^^m M8ijL,^^u M-, ,,^,:' '■- '' ' 



Fig. 27. 




Fig. 28. 
The present trend in motive equipment is toward increased motor driven machinery. 

Above: Three and one-half ton farm truck. 

Center: Caterpillar type tractor and combined grain harvester. 

Below: Battery of "75-s" pulling giant land levelers. 



160 FARM MANAGEMENT 

tractors or horses. If special equipment is needed for tractors, its addi- 
tional cost should be taken into account in the estimate of the relative 
expensiveness. The table above includes only motive power; it does not 
take into account depreciation on plows, harrows, or other implements, 
which in some cases may differ in initial cost for either tractors or horses. 
Farm Work Requiring Horses. — In working out similar projects one 
should bear in mind that on all farms some horses are needed for work 
which engines can not do, such as: 

(a) Hauling on road. 
(6) Cleaning ditches. 

(c) Odd jobs of scraper work. 

(d) Mowing, raking, and hauling off hay. 

(e) Cleaning around barns, pens, corrals, etc; 

Farm Work Requiring Mechanical Force. — On the other hand there is 
work an engine can do to advantage, such as: 

(a) Pumping water. 

(b) Sawing wood. 

(c) Hauling large road loads. 

(d) Threshing. 

(e) Ensilage cutting. 

(/) Grubbing trees or pulling stumps 
(g) Cleaning grain. 

Replacement of Horses by Traptors. — In general on the small farm great 
care is needed to determine to what extent tractors can profitably replace 
horses, since to be most economical, engines can replace to advantage 
only work stock used primarily for field work. In general it is in- 
teresting to note that the more time horses are idle the greater is the 
advantage which the tractor enjoys. 

Literature on Farm Tractors. — To provide tractor data for farm man- 
agement use several publications are obtainable. The latest are included 
in the reference list: 

Published 

U. S. D. A. Department Bulletin. 174 1915 

U. S. D. A. Farmers' Bulletin 719 1916 

U. S. D. A. Farmers' Bulletin 963 1918 

U. S. D. A. Farmers' Bnlletin 1 ,004 1918 

U. S. D. A. Farmers' Bulletin 1 ,035 1919 

Purdue University Circular 89 1919 

Pennsylvania State College Bidletin 158 1919 

Kentucky Agr. Experiment Station Bulletin 222 1919 

Iowa Agr. Experiment Station Circular 63 1919 

U. S. D. A. Farmers' Bulletin 1 ,093 1920 



CHAPTER IX 
BUILDING EQUIPMENT 

A discussion of satisfactory building types cannot be fully made in the 
space here allotted to the subject. Farm management is, however, 
directly concerned to insure selection of suitable types of structure to 
meet given needs, and either to keep expenditures within economical 
limits or else to relieve the farm business of the responsibility of unduly 
heavy outlay for lavish or freakish or surplus or ''folly" buildings, 
charging the difference between that which is just and proper, and that 
which is extravagant and unnecessary, to its proper place, i.e., to personal 
taste, ignorance, experience, wilful disregard of business principles, or to 
luxury. 

Regional Variation in Building Equipment. — Most neighborhoods 
have worked out more or less standard types of buildings under the 
limitations of climate, building material, building skill, and taste. 
This applies not only to dwellings but to stock and hay barns, hoghouses, 
poultry shelters, implement sheds, and outbuildings. Some idea of this 
regional variation is conveyed in the accompanying photographs. 

Examples of Regional Variation in Building Equipment. — This difference is 
shown in the southern, eastern, and northern portions of the United States where 
dwelling construction runs to clapboards, blinds, brick foundations, and brick chim- 
neys, in contrast with the sawed rustic, tile chimneys, and concrete sills of the West. 
Barns and outbuildings in the West, are of plain boards or boards and battens usually 
unpainted, single story with shingle or shake or galvanized iron roofs. In the South 
barns are mostly small, unpainted, makeshift affairs of nondescript construction. 
In the East and North the barns are large substantial structures often of two stories, 
clapboarded, shingled, painted, fitted vnih. glazed windows, and often decorated with 
a cupola and weather vane. Other structures are limited in number and inconspicuous 
in the South, while eastern farmers build implement sheds and storage quarters, clap- 
boarded, shingled, and painted. In the West the collection is usually rather large 
and of motley appearance, being built from time to time as needs arise. 

Further evidences of difference are found in interior arrangement, equipment, 
and finish. 

Variation in Interior Finish and Equipment. — The better class of eastern barns are 
ceiled with tongue and groove, a practice seldom met under western conditions. 
All eastern and northern structures are well floored; many western barns still rest on 
nothing but natural ground. 

Types of mangers and watering devices differ, according to local custom and to 
amount and character of feeding methods. In cold climates where cows are indoors 
much of the time, swinging stanchions are the rule; in sections where the cows are 
housed only for milking, cheaper, rigid tie-ups satisfactorily serve the purpose 
11 161 



162 



FARM MANAGEMENT 




Figs. 29-34. — Types of farm dwellings. 

1. Settler's cottage on newly opened western land (California). 

2. A Kentucky cabin. 

3. Buildings of logs sealed with adobe (Colorado!. 

4. Buildings of stone, straw and mud. Russian construction. Semi-arid region. Note the blocks 
of dried manure for fuel piled in foreground. 

5. The New England type of continuous building. Promotes comfort in winter, but at greater 
risk of fire. 

6. Buildings of the dairy region (Michigan), 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 



163 



Good and Bad in Farm Buildings. — There is no one outstanding best 
structure for all conditions. That is, one cannot suggest a single standard 
type of cowbarn or house or hog pen or fence that will fit all conditions. As 
has already been said, much depends upon the use to which the structure 
is to be put, to climatic conditions, to the location of the structure, and 
to available building materials. A few general rules, however, are pos- 
sible for guidance and caution. 

Building Equipment Should Be Economical and Simple. — The first 
point to bear in mind is to construct buildings as cheaply and simply as 
possible. The simpler the construction compatible with length of life, 
the better they will serve the purpose. This is especially worth consider- 
ing in regions of mild climates, where the weather renders unnecessary 



ifitt^.;iJL':..'ik' 




Fig. 35.^Stacking hay in open, where feasible, saves barn and shed space and 

lessens hibor. 



the costlier buildings called for elsewhere. Money put into costly 
buildings is not only unavailable for other and perhaps better use, but 
the product of the ranch must pay interest thereon as discussed above. 
Buildings Should Serve the Profit-making Farm Enterprises. — When the 
farm is viewed from the standpoint of a ''business proposition" — a 
means of making money — it will be more clearly seen that the relation of 
buildings to the general scheme must be dependent on their usefulness 
in contributing to the money-making power of the ranch. Looked at in 
this way, all the structures to stand the test must be built consistent with 
the nature of the produce turned off. Let them therefore be plain and sub- 
stantial; well protected by paint from weathering, if of wood; provided with 
ample space in relation to purpose, with maximum convenience as regards 
both relative positions of buildings and interior arrangement of each indi- 
vidual building, and with abundant light and ventilation when these are 
needed; and one has all that sound business and good farming demand. 



164 FARM MANAGEMENT 

It is, of course, not to be inferred from the above that buildings 
must be grotesque, ugly, weird, or abnormal, to fulfil their mission. 
Wisdom suggests against the use, for instance, of matched boards where 
rough lumber would do; of shingles where shakes would serve as well 
or of galvanized iron if this is more expensive, of ginger-bread decor- 
ations, and of unnecessarily fancy interior finish. On the whole, as a 
redeeming feature, one will find that most farm buildings which fulfill 
their purpose best, are usually of good substantial proportions, and 
by their very plainness have a certain dignity of outline which appeals. 

Studying Proposed Buildings. — When the type and size of each build- 
ing has been agreed upon, rough plans should then be made on paper, the 
ground floor plan staked out, and the whole proposed structure studied 
from every angle. Suggestions may well be sought fi^om those men who 
will have to use it, i.e., of carpenter and blacksmith and harness maker 
concerning their respective shops, of cooks regarding kitchens, women 
regarding house arrangement, irrigator regarding ditch structures, etc. 
After such tentative building plans are made, the farm manager should 
in his mind go over the various operations to be carried on within the 
structures, thus forming a mental impression of the future use to see if 
the arrangement as planned is as nearly ideal as possible. It is well, 
too, to plan the structures so that additions can be made later. This 
applies particularly to farm house, barn, bunkhouse, and granary, 
especially if the land is capable of greater development. 

Procedure in Building. — While the services of an architect and con- 
tractor are desirable in providing new building equipment, nearly every 
farmer and rancher must ordinarily rely upon himself. Handicapped by 
lack of capital or by remoteness, the planning and erection must com- 
monly rest on local resources. It therefore stands one in hand to know 
how to begin. The ordinary procedure is: 

(a) Select the proper buildings for the purpose. 

(6) Draw up a bill of materials. 

(c) Estimate costs. 

(d) Make a working plan for carpenters' use. 

(e) Locate each building and the whole group on the most favorable 
site. 

(/) Establish an order of grouping which will retain the proper loca- 
tion of one building with respect to another — the farmstead arrangement. 

Construction Suggestions. — Have sewer facilities and running water 
in the house. The convenience and pleasure of decent living more than 
offset the additional cost. 

Put in plenty of bins, shelves, and cupboards for provisions and uten- 
sils. Have them handy. Proper putting away of provisions means 
saving; in dishing up flour, sugar, there is no spilling; damage by mice, 
ants, cockroaches is reduced to a minimum; and a ready inventory of 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 



165 



stores can be taken quickly, thus avoiding duplication or an over-abun- 
dance of supplies. It saves the cook's time, too, when hurrying to pre- 
pare a big meal. 




Fig. 36. 




Fig. 37. — Two unusual types of Farm Structures. 

Above: Private fruit packing shed costing $20,000. 
Below: Dairy equipment of a State Hospital. 



When married men are hired, give their wives wash-house facilities. 
Such a place can also be used for canning and storing fruits, vegetables, 
etc. 

Have proper washing facilities for the men. For personal use a wash 
room with wooden sink containing basins is satisfactory enough, together 
with a shower bath in a room partitioned off. Men will not use bath 
tubs. Facilities in the way of a stove or open fireplace with kettle should 



166 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



be given the men to wash their clothes. It can often be arranged to pipe 
hot water to the shower bath by putting a coil in the bunk house stove. 

Utilize the space under water towers for storage or sleeping rooms 
by boarding in the sides. 

Keep coal oil in outhouse away from house on account of fire danger. 

Keep fire extinguishers, such as hand grenades, in easily accessible 
places, or if place is big enough to warrant it, purchase a chemical engine 
— which costs from $150 to $500 — and teach the men how to operate 
it. Have an occasional fire drill. Axes and buckets of water reserved 
for fire use only have many times put out small fires in time to prevent 
serious conflagrations. 

Provide facilities for keeping meat and milk. 

Defmition of Bill of Materials. — A bill of materials is a statement 
covering the various sizes, kinds, and amounts of lumber, nails, hardware, 
shingles, paint, milled goods, concrete, necessary to the construction of 
a building. 

Making a Bill of Materials. — This is obtained by determining the 
kinds and quantities of lumber or other material needed to secure the 
required size, strength, and durability in the finished structure. The 
width, thickness, and length of each piece of lumber is determined, using 
as short lengths as possible for economy after which totals are secured, 
and the whole reduced to board-feet. Nails, spikes, bolts, sash, door 
frames, paint, concrete work, hardware and extras are then added. The 
cost of labor is finally affixed. 




»W»«»t*rJ J far- ecch /-^'jSC-vr 
T*r^ e-r eac^ C^. ^ach 



Dimerrsicns fSxSZ'- /4' S£/^TS 

C/eaK /fr'/i?»'. '^es/ c^ S/>ver o^cre 
in /111/ /cfi- ^e// Si.yafK>,-^/7y jfbo^ 



Fig. 38. — Ground plan of dairy barn^^ for which bill of materials is listed in text. 



Examples of Bills of Materials. — Bill of Materials for Dairy Barn. — The following 
is an example of a detailed bill of material for a milking barn for 24 cows.^" The 
dimensions of this barn are 42 by 32 ft. and 18 ft. from foundation to eaves. A large 
amount of storage room for hay is provided. The drawing shows a width of 32 ft. 
Some dairymen prefer a barn 34 ft. wide, and this plan may easily be changed to the 
latter dimension at a slightly added cost. 

Either horizontal or vertical siding may be used, the cost being practically the 
same in either case. A bill of materials for horizontal siding is given below. 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 

Bill of Materials — Horizontal Siding — Self-supporting Roof 
18 ft. to eaves. Dimensions 42 by 32 ft. 
Sills- 
West side, 3 pieces 2 X 6 X 14. 
East side, 3 pieces 2 X 6 X 14. 
Two ends, 4 pieces 2 X 6 X 10. 
Studs — 

West side, 22 pieces 2 X 6 X 18. 
East side, 22 pieces 2 X 6 X 18. 

{Continued on next page.) 



167 




Fig. 39. — Illustrating framing balloon barn for vertical siding. 




Fig. 40. — Illustrating framing of balloon barn*^ for horizontal siding. 

Examples of framing for horizontal or vertical siding. 

(Same barn as Fig. 38.) 



168 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Two ends, 28 pieces 2 X 6 X 18. 
For north end above eaves, 8 pieces 2 X 6 X 14. 
For north end above eaves, 4 pieces 2 X 6 X 12. 
For south end above eaves, 8 pieces 2 X 6 X 14. 
For south end above eaves, 4 pieces 2 X 6 X 12. 
Corner storm braces for sides, 4 pieces 2 X 8 X 24. 
Corner storm braces for ends, 4 pieces 2 X 8 X 24. 

Plates — 

West side (nail together 2 pieces 2 X 6) 6 pieces 2 X 6 X 14. 
East side, 6 pieces 2 X 6 X 14. 
• North end, 4 pieces 2 X 6 X 16. 
South end, 4 pieces 2 X 6 X 16. 





PANEL BETWEEN TE,V55E5 ENP C0N5TEU^TI0N 

Fig. 41. — Example of side and end framing of barn.^'' (Same barn as Fig. 38.) 



Center posts, 8 pieces 6X6X7. 
Girders, 6 pieces 6 X 10 X 14. 
Side joists, 44 pieces 2 X 10 X 12. 
Center joists, 22 pieces 2 X 10 X 10. 
Joist support or ribbon, 6 pieces 2 X 6 X 14. 

Roof Truss — 

Top section of rafters, 44 pieces 2 X 6 X 10. 

Ridge pole, 3 pieces 1 X 6 X 16. 

Side section of rafters, 44 pieces 2 X 6 X 14. 

Braces between side and top, 88 pieces 1 X 6 X 10. 

Braces between side and posts, 44 pieces 1 X 6 X 10 

Braces between studs and joist, 44 pieces 1X6X8. 

Braces at top (collar beam), 22 pieces 2X6X6. 

Extension at eaves, 44 pieces, 2X6X4. 

Cornice, 13 pieces 1 X 6 X 14. 

Window framing, 16 pieces J^ X 8 X 14. 

Weather strips for window frames, 16 pieces i^ X 1 X 12. 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 



169 



Loft floor tongue and grooved second grade, 1,400 sq. ft. 

Roofing, 2,400 sq. ft. actual surface measurement, 21,600 shingles. 

4 in. sheathing 4 in. space between, 1,500 sq. ft. 
Siding (drop siding No. 2 grade) — 

For sides, 1,500 sq. ft. 
For ends, 1,800 sq. ft. 
Hardware — 

Roofing nails required (3 lb. per 1,000 shingles) 66 lb. 

2 kegs 20d nails— 200 lb. 

3 kegs 8d nails— 300 lb. 

5 pairs screw barn door hinges. 

16 pairs 3-in. strap, hinges for windows. 
10 ft. track for sliding door. 

1 pair barn door hangers complete. 
16 window sash, 9 lights 10 X 12 in. 






PIRT ri,OOR 



TLOOR PLAN 



Figs. 42-43. — Horse barn for which bill of materials is indicated in text.^' 



170 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Bill of Materials for Horse Barn. — A summarized bill of materials for 
a barn for eight head of work stock runs as follows :*^ 



Barns for Work Animals (See Figs. 42-43) 
Lumber 



10 pieces 2 X 


4—12, No. 




76 pieces 2 X 


6—12, No. 




14 pieces 2 X 


6—14, No. 




120 pieces 2 X 


6—16, No. 




74 pieces 2 X 


6—18, No. 




47 pieces 2 X 


6—20, No. 




2 pieces 2 X 


6—22, No. 




8 pieces 2 X 


6—24, No. 




25 pieces 2 X 


8—20, No. 




2 pieces 2 X 


8—16, No. 




2 pieces 2 X 12—16, No. 




31 pieces 2 X 12—14, No. 




31 pieces 2 X 12—18, No. 




1 pieces 4 X 


6—20, No. 




10 pieces 6 X 


6—18, No. 




1 pieces 4 X 


4—10, No. 




1 pieces 4 X 


4—16, No. 




13 pieces 1 X 12—12, No. 




4 pieces 1 X 


12—16, No. 




6 pieces 1 X 


12—20, No. 




4 pieces 1 X 10—12, No. 




3 pieces 1 X 


8—16, No. 




6 pieces 1 X 


5—10, No. 




6 pieces 1 X 


5—12, No. 




4 pieces 1 X 


5—16, No. 




14 pieces 1 X 


5—18, No. 




14 pieces 1 X 


5—20, No. 




11 pieces 1 X 


6—12, No. 




62 pieces 1 X 


6—14, No. 




66 pieces 1 X 


6—16, No. 




8 pieces 1 X 


6—18, No. 




16 pieces 1 X 


6—20, No. 




Drop Siding No. 117. 







Board feet 

80 

932 

196 

1,920 

1,332 

940 

44 
192 
667 

43 

64 

868 

1,116 

40 
540 

13 

21 
156 

64 
120 

40 

32 

25 

30 

27 
105 
117 

66 
434 
528 

72 

160 

3,600 



D.&M. flooring 2,400 

D.&M. flooring 23—1 X 4—14, No. 1 
D.&M. flooring 18—1 X 4—16 No. 1 . 
D.&M. flooring 10—1 X 4—10 No. 1. 



108 
96 
33 



Shiplap No. 2—1 X 8 2,300 

190 

332 

21 

No.2 1-760 



58—1 X 4—10 No. 1. 

83—1 X 4—12 No. 1. 

4—1 X 4—16 No. 1. 



1X4 



Total 21,744 

To 21,744 board ft. lumber at $27.50 per M $597.96 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 

Other material: 

66 ft. 12-in. galvanized iron ridge roll at 12 f! foot $7.90 

14 pairs 8-in. strap hinges, at 25^ pair 3 . 50 

48 ft. barn door track, at 12 1^^ ^ foot 6 . 00 

8 barn door hangers, at $1 . 25 each 10. 00 

80 M by 8-in. bolts, at 5 i each 4 . 00 

500 lb. nails at $4. 50 per 100 lb 22 . 50 

6 single-sash, 6-light, glass 12 X 14 in. windows at $1 . 50 each 9 . 00 

4 check rail windows, 12-light, glass 12 X 14 in. at $3 . 00 each. 12 . 00 

32,000 shingles, at $4.00 per M 128.00 

3,000 sq. ft. No. 1 shiplap, at $25.00 75 00 

Total . . ; $277. 90 



171 




Fig. 44. — Example of framing truss for balloon frame barn."*^ (Same barn as Fig. 41.) 



Foundation : 

Continuous concrete: 

8 cu. yd. sand, at $1.25 per yard $ 10.00 

50 bbl. cement, at $2 . 00 barrel 100 . 00 

55 cu. yd. sand and gravel, at $1.35 per yard 74.25 

Total $184.25 

Concrete piers: 

Forty piers, 9 X 9 X 18 in., footings 18 X 18 X 12 in. 3 cu. 
ft., concrete in each pier. 

8 cu. yd. sand and gravel, at $1 . 35 per yard 10 . 80 

6 bbl. cement, at $2 . 00 barrel 12 . 00 

Extra lumber for sills: 

16 pieces 6 X 6—12—576 ft., 
6 pieces 6 X 6—16—288 ft.— 864 ft., 

at $27.50 per M 23.75 

Total ' $ 46 . 55 



172 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Detailed Plans of Construction. — Detailed plans of construction for 
practice in reading working drawings are herewith illustrated. Variety 
exists in framing designs according to type of structure, and size, and local 
practices. Those shown are, however, typical. 




Fig. 45. — Illustrating side framing of barn.*^ 



Space Allotment in Buildings.— Ohio^^ found the average floor and 
cubic space per head of live stock, averaged for 21 farms to be: 

Table 48. — Average Building Space for Animals (Ohio)^^ 





Average 


space per head 




Floor 


Cubic 


HorsGS 


87.5 
83.4 
11.6 
19.2 


748.8 


Cattle 


708.4 


Sheep 


100.9 




171.3 







Other common dimensions allotted for stock are shown in the next 
table. 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 



173 




■5X4-^ 



aA6-7 






STWC I 



JX4.-^ 



"^^-1 



J>Ois\Z JDOORS 
5X12' E^CH. 



ft 6-^ 









3X4^ 



4X6^ 






JOOR 

ax 8 



=^ 



OR 
■6R0ln\); 



J>4n 



■»A6^ 



=^^^ 



^^ 




Fig. 46. — Example of end and truss framing of A-roofed barn.^ 



174 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 49. — Building Space Allotments 
Cow Barns 

Feet 

Usual length of cow stands 5 

Usual width of cow stands 3J^ 

Rear alley, including gutter 5 

Feed alley, including mangers '. 18 

Height of walls to eaves 9 

Pitch of roof .... )^ 

Width of manger 2 . 

Horse Barns 

Usual length of single stalls, including mangers 10 

Usual width of single stalls 5 

Width of mangers 2 

Rear alley 8 

Height of walls to eaves 10 

Pitch of roof '^i 

Box stalls 12 X 12 

Hay Barns 

Cubic feet 

Usual allowance of space per ton: 

Loose grain hay 500 

Baled grain hay 155 

Baled alfalfa hay 160 

Warehouses 

Usual allowance of space per ton: 

Sacked barley 65 

Sacked wheat 50 

Middlings and bran 70 

Dried sugar beet pulp 135 

Hog Pens 

Farrowing pens — inside 6X9 ft., outside 6 X 12 ft. 

Feed alley between farrowing pens 5 ft. 

Partitions 4 ft. 

Poultry Houses 

Allowance per fowl of floor space 2 sq. ft. 

Allowance per fowl of perch room 10 in. 

The Farmstead -3 

Once the Hst of structures for a given business has been worked out, 
in accordance with the discussion of the last section, an inquiry 
logically follows into the placing of buildings. Both the relation of one 
building to another and the relation of the group to the rest of the farm 
are matters for consideration. In providing building equipment the 
investment is so large that time and attention to these two particulars 
are amply justified. 

Consideration should be directed in the order of: 

1. The location of the farmstead as a unit, and 

2. The arrangement of structures comprising the farmstead. 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 



175 



A New York farmstead. 




A California ranch farmstead 



Figs. 47-50.— Examples of farmsteads and building layouts. 



176 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Definition of Farmstead. — The group of farm buildings and adjoining 
lots, yards and corrals, together with the home orchard and garden, 
constitute what is commonly called the farmstead. 

Variations in Farmsteads. — Farmsteads range from a very simple set 
of buildings necessary for a family-size farm to those of the large ranches 
and big corporation farms, — of extensive sets of buildings requiring con- 
siderable acreage to provide satisfactory setting. For every farm must 
give up to this purpose more or less of valuable land, the size of the 
necessary area varying with the type and magnitude of the business, the 
climatic conditions, and the individual tastes of the operator. 

Rearranging Existing Farmsteads. — In the older agricultural sections 
the question of new structures is usually secondary to a study of the con- 
venience and suitability of existing buildings and an inquiry into the 
possibility of rearranging the present layout for greater economy in use. 
Very few established farmers are in a position to tear down all their old 
structures and build entirely anew or to move to a new location, but many 
farms can be improved by rearranging or remodeling some of the build- 
ings in order to save the time and energy of the workers in the performance 
of routine duties. 

Planning New Farmsteads. — In the newer farming sections — espe- 
cially in the western States where subdivision of the large ranches into 
small farms, settling up of large holdings, and reclamation of desert and 
swamp lands, are in full swing — the planning of a farmstead and its 
complement of buildings can often start with the bare land, and so the 
ultimate plan can be thought out and developed in the light of present 
experience as to site and as to choice and arrangement of buildings. 

Suggestions for the Farmstead 

In planning for a new farmstead or in preparing to rearrange an exist- 
ing farmstead, certain suggestions should be kept in mind. 

Location and Site for Farmstead. — In determining the position of the 
farmstead attention should be paid to the arrangement of fields, which 
in turn is influenced by topography, drainage, soil conditions, location 
of natural pasturage, cropping scheme, etc. Ease of access to fields from 
buildings is highly desirable; without it, there is inconvenience and loss 
of time. This consideration is, of course, less important to the small than 
to the large farm. The relation of the farmstead to the fields should be 
planned to reduce the time consumed in: (1) traveling to and from them 
with various implements, or in driving stock, (2) supplying fields with 
stock water from a central supply, (3) fencing, to avoid long lanes. 

Relation to Highway. — Probably the greatest single factor determining 
the general disposition of farm buildings is the location of the farm 
in relation to the highway. If it is desirable or more convenient to 
establish the farmstead close to the highway, something may be lost in the 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 177 

reduction of economic access to the fields, yet, while the farmstead so 
placed may be subjected to considerable dust, passing traffic is often a 
source of much interest, and ability to observe at close range or to hail 
those passing tends to promote social intercourse and participation in 
community affairs. • 

A cross-road is often the logical site, for towns, railroads, schools, 
churches, etc., may all so lie that such a corner of the farm is nearest to 
them. If more important considerations do not oppose, this factor 
might well determine the farmstead site, on the grounds of time saved in 
traveling to and from the farm, quick access to both highways, and the 
handling of live stock and farm traffic through a rear entrance, dwelling 
and front yard thus being left undisturbed. 

Topography. — For the site of a farmstead, select land having a moder- 
ate elevation with slopes to the south and east, neither so high as to be 
difficult of access nor so low as to be subject to frost, poor in drainage, 
or lacking in air circulation. Such a choice is essential not alone in 
the reduction of costs but in relation to the good health of the family. 
Even though the desired slope cannot be obtained, the farmstead 
should be placed on land sufficiently high to carry off all surface water 
from about the buildings and grounds, and to provide for sewers or 
other sanitary conveniences. Good drainage insures comparatively dry 
yards, corrals, barns, and driveways, making it easier to get around in 
bad weather and more comfortable for the stock. The building site 
should be on good soil, if it is obtainable, for the sake of orchard, garden, 
and wind-break. 

It is better to sacrifice a little crop-producing land rather than handi- 
cap the farmstead with poor soil. Sandy or gravelly soils, if favorable 
for plant growth, possess the desirable quality of rapid drainage. Hence 
they lend themselves particularly well for building sites. The selection 
of good soil needs special attention in many semi-arid western localities 
where on the level plain lands a knoll is occasionally found that is attrac- 
tive because of its elevation but is heavily impregnated with alkali. 
While good soil within the farmstead should be sought, care should be 
taken to keep from having too much valuable crop producing land in 
yards, roads, and lanes. 

Water Supply. — The relation of the farmstead to the water supply 
is also important. If the water can be piped from a stream, spring, or 
well, for delivery by gravity, the advantage of such an arrangement ought 
by all means to be taken into account. 

Sightliness. — Study of possible sites should also look to obtaining 
both a maximum degree of sunlight during the rainy or winter season 
and shade sufficient to provide relief from the glare of the burning days 
of the dry or summer months. The sun's course must be observed in 
connection with the placing of stock shelters an4 sheds. Attention, too, 

12 



178 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



should be paid to pleasing landscape vistas. While an attractice view 
in a certain direction does not warrant sacrificing important features in 
the farmstead plan, yet its possible enjoyment from the dwelling may 
make it worthy of very careful consideration. The direction of the 
wind, especially during the summer months, should determine the 
location of the dwelling so that odors and dust shall be carried away. 

Breezes. — So too, the farmstead should if possible get the benefit of the 
prevailing summer breezes. 




Fig. 51. — Typical groundplan outline of farmstead. Note the provision for loca- 
tion east of highway, distance of dwelling from road, easy access to the house, avoid- 
ance of dust, lane for the heavier farm purposes, pleasing landscape plantings, grouping 
of farm structures according to use, freedom from farm yard odors, and saving of 
steps and energy in caring for stock. ^^ 

Natural Protection. — It is desirable that protection be provided 
against cold winds, rain, and snow. It not only costs more to warm an 
exposed house, but also more feed is required to maintain stock in unshel- 
tered lots and fields. Usually a south or southwest slope will be more 
protected from winds and storms, while on the other hand the planting 
of trees may furnish a windbreak. This may be provided by an orchard; 
or else a shelter belt to windward may be grown of trees selected 
according to their desirability. The hardier varieties, including a goodly 
proportion of evergreens, should make a permanent planting. Buildings 
may also be placed in a way to act as windbreaks to yards or to one 
another. Board fences instead of wire are also valuable in sheltering 
yards from cold winds. 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 179 

Fences. — Needless fences should be avoided on account of costs of 
building and maintenance, loss of land occupied, and danger of harboring 
weed and insect pests. 

Not Necessary to Cramp the Farm Building Site. — While efficiency 
should aid in selection of site and determination of size in providing for 
farm buildings, it should not entirely govern. Adverse comment is 
frequently directed toward country places using one or two acres of 
$1,000 land for the farmstead and its lawns, flowers, and gardens. It 
looks large at first glance, yet a common 50-ft. city lot at $40 or $50 per 
front foot amounts to $2,000 to $2,500 and no one complains that its 
user is extravagant. This city lot of about ^i acre is not fully equalled 
in price by 2 acres in the country. 

Size need not be the limiting factor in country places but rather 
proper utilization of the land reserved for the home and farm buildings. 
The amount of money, time, and energy available to prepare, plant out, 
and care for the land and structures must guide. A smaller acreage, 
well tended, "homey" and attractive, is far superior to a large acreage 
if size is attained at the expense of proper care and neatness. Yet the 
larger area is entirely justified if it can be given the proper care. Space, 
trees, flowers, shady nooks, pleasant vistas, hammock room, summer 
houses, sunshine, peace, and outdoor opportunities for the children 
contribute largely to the charm of the country. Individual tastes and 
pocketbooks must determine how much one can have, but the more the 
better, if fullest enjoyment of country life is to be gained. 

Grouping Buildings. — After selecting the numbers and types of 
buildings their arrangement within the farmstead follows. 

This involves the placing of the various buildings, yards, corrals, 
etc., with relation each to the other, to fields, and to highways. 

Five factors should be borne in mind in making up the layout. These 
are: 

1. Economical Arrangement. — An economical arrangement to insure a 
minimum of time consumed, no necessity for retracing steps, and curtail- 
ment of lost motion in executing the routine work of the farm. This 
means the putting together of structures which have a common function. 

Carrying of feed, milk, harness, and other routine details amount to 
many miles during the year, so that saving but a few minutes a day can 
result in a material saving when totaled for the year. Steps can be saved 
by placing buildings which logically go together as closely as possible 
without to an undue extent incurring additional fire risk. 

In dairies, the bull pens, milking sheds, calf barns, feed corrals, separator room, and 
silos, naturally go together. Mixing sheds for stock feed should be close to the feed- 
ing yards. All hog pens, soaking vats for grain, store houses, farrowing pens, boar 
pens, tank houses, and dipping and sorting pens, form a natural group. The barns 
for work stock, storage and feed, harness shops, wash racks, garage, sheds, stud bams, 



180 FARM MANAGEMENT 

hospitals, and corrals, similarly form a unit. The implement house should be near the 
quarters for the work stock. In the same way, wood shed and meat house shoxild be 
close to the kitchen. The tank house, if water is pumped by power, should be close 
to the beaten path of the man who looks after it. If drainage permits, the well 
should be between the house and stock watering places, and — to save piping — on as 
nearly a direct line as possible. 

2. Legal Restrictions. — ^Legal restrictions, if they be involved, are 
illustrated in the production of whole milk, since municipal regulations 
often prescribe the environment under which the city's supply of milk 
shall be produced. 

In California, for instance, the milking barn must be 50 ft. from horse stables or 
manure piles and 100 ft. from privy vaults or hog pens. The milk house must be 
100 ft. from each of these four sources of contamination, and must be entirely separate 
from the milking quarters. 

3. Individual Taste. — Personal taste is reflected in a desire to be near 
the highway, to have the house face a particularly pleasing view, to 
remove the dwelling from the rest of the ranch buildings, and in various 
similar ways. Personal taste ought to be guided, however, by common 
practice, for in the event of sale, eccentric or freakish arrangements 
are liable to reduce the selling value of the plant. 

4. Extensiveness of the Plant. — On many small farms the building 
equipment consists of dwelling, barn, tank and tank tower, chicken 
house, implement shed, and fenced area for a small planting of shrubbery, 
sometimes a kitchen garden, and occasionally a family orchard. On the 
large holdings the list is extended to include the owner's or superin- 
tendent's dwelling, barns, bunkhouses, blacksmith and harness repair 
shops, corrals, office building, cook house, warehouses, and structures 
specially needed according to the type of farming, such as milk houses, 
hide storehouse, slaughter house, winery, shed for cutting, drying, and 
storing fruit, stock quarters, oil house, gardener's quarters, tractor sheds, 
etc., through a long list. 

The planning of the small farmstead is a rather simple matter, and 
can be largely determined by personal desires and tastes, supplemented 
by a few standard suggestions. The planning of buildings for the large 
holdings calls for considerable study and forethought. 

5. Available Capital. — Use of temporary structures, or less elaborate 
than might be desirable, is necessary if available capital is limited; 
and limitation of capital will to a great extent be a factor determining 
both the indulgence of personal tastes and the obtaining of the most 
economical arrangement. 

Distance Between Buildings. — Usually a minimum of 100 ft. should 
separate the house from the highway. This distance permits of an 
attractive setting, provides a measure of privacy, and at the same time 
retains intimate relation with the highway, while no great length of 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 



181 



:tiian'sl r 



►4"! 1 Pump 

'■-lid Souse 

1r 



Farmstead 

Oalif. Packing Corporation 

at Tuttle 

Oalifornia 

(Scale 50- 1") 



w 20 

o 

M J. 



Garage 



1^"^ 



Machiue 
Sled 



1. Ground plan. 




The niesslial 



^. The bunkhoTis 




5. The barn. 6. Thi- irnplrment .shed and earpenter shop. 

Figs. 52-57. — Standard farmstead arrangement and buildings of 320-acre orchard 
units, designed and erected by a California fruit growing corporation. Very satis- 
factory under conditions of hot summers and mild winters. 



182 FARM MANAGEMENT 

drive need be built, maintained, or repaired. The barns should be 150 
ft. from the house, to the rear, and where the door of the barn may be 
visible from the house. 

Lanes. — Lanes to farm buildings should be so placed that there is a 
minimum loss of land, with no likelihood of dust or mud to inconvenience 
the family. Often a lane to the buildings separate from that provided 
for the dwelling is a distinct advantage. 

Axis of Stock Barns. — The axis of the stock barns should be so placed 
that the stock have the benefit of some sunlight during part of the day 
and of cool breezes blowing throughout the length of the structure during 
the hot season. 

Location of Silos. — Silos should be located close to the barn or feed 
yard, yet far enough away from the neighboring structures to permit 
ease in filling and emptying. 

Screening Unsightly Structures and Accumulations. — Hen houses, hog 
pens, wash houses, privies, drying yards, manure piles, accumulations of 
old parts of implements and similar odds and ends, and unsightly build- 
ings, should be placed well to the rear of the farmstead and screened by 
proper kinds of plantings. 

Confining Poultry and Live Stock. — Live stock, and especially poultry, 
should not be allowed to run at will over the farmstead, if in so doing they 
become a nuisance. Their quarters should be convenient to the dwell- 
ing in case the womenfolk are called upon to care for them, but the hen 
house should not be placed near the dwelling. The orchard, if made 
poultry-tight, provides an excellent run; or if trimmings and waste from 
the vegetable garden can be utilized, the poultry house may with advan- 
tage be placed close to the garden. 

Care should be given to the planning of stock watering places and 
sewage disposal to provide convenient, sanitary, unobtrusive facilities. 

Landscape Effects. — The planting of hedges and shrubbery, and erec- 
tion of trellises to shut out unsightly buildings or accumulations, should 
proceed as soon as practicable. Where conservation of winter sunlight 
is desired, trees that shed their leaves during the winter season are to be 
preferred; and especially let it be remarked that those which shed within 
a limited time make far less work in cleaning up rubbish. If properly kept, 
the orchard and garden can be made an important part of the landscape 
effect. The laying out of roads, the planting, of lawn and shrubbery, 
should combine both the practical and the esthetic. Trees about the 
house are both ornamental and useful in that they provide an attractive 
setting for the farmstead and frame views from the house, and by their 
shade add comfort and pleasure. The use of grass may be extended to 
the poultry or stock yards where the added production will be a decided 
benefit. 



BUILDING EQUIPMENT 183 

Trees for Temporary Landscape. — If the selected site is lacking in 
natural foliage, a few trees of rapid growth can be planted for temporary 
use to be cut out when more desirable but slower growing varieties have 
attained sufficient size. A neatly designed and well kept boundary fence 
may be made a distinct asset in the landscape effect and at the same 
time assist in excluding animals. 

Details of planting plans and landscape arrangement are available 
in a 63-page Bulletin from the pen of F. L. Mulford, published by 
the United States Department of Agriculture.^*' 

The Plan on Paper ^^ 

In order to study the arrangement of a farmstead or the planning 
of farm buildings to the best advantage, plans should be worked out on 
paper. When the approximate location of the farmstead has been de- 
cided and before any building or fencing is done, there should be prepared 
two plans — one of the whole farm, at a scale which will admit of ample and 
easily read legends and notes (100 ft. to the inch answers the purpose very 
well), and one of the farmstead at a much larger scale, preferably 20 ft. to 
the inch. 

Details of the Farm Plan Map. — The first plan or plat should show 
the location of the farmstead, all roads and lanes, fields, lots, streams, 
drains (the location of which is easily forgotten), ditches, fences, 
permanent natural objects, and all buildings in block form. The fields 
should be numbered or designated by letters, and the sizes indicated. 
This will be of assistance in determining the amount of fertilizer and seed 
needed, in calculating the returns from the crops, in the farm bookkeeping, 
and in keeping the record of each field, etc. 

The plat should be made in ink on tracing linen or thin, tough 
paper, from which blueprints or, better, whiteprints, can be made. The 
original should be carefully preserved and the prints used for record- 
ing crop rotations, amount of fertilizer and seed used, and any other 
desirable data. Changes in layout can be made on the original, and a 
print of the original retained as a record. 

Details of the Farmstead Map. — The second, or farmstead plan, 
should be in much greater detail than the general farm plat, and therefore 
should be drawn on a larger scale. In this plan the several buildings 
should be shown with the general interior arrangements indicated; all 
minor accessories, such as watering troughs, feeding racks, scales, 
fences, gates, hitching rail, all lanes and driveways, walks, trees, shrub- 
bery, etc., should be located upon the plan, each feature being placed with 
due consideration of its use and its relation to other features, as has been 
pointed out. It is an excellent scheme to cut out flat pieces of paper 
representing each structure. They should be made to the same scale 
as the plan, and should show the general arrangement of the interiors, 



184 FARM MANAGEMENT 

so that the relations of each to the other may be studied. They may be 
shifted about into different positions until a satisfactory arrangement 
has been secured. 

The working out of the farmstead plan on paper is of inestimable 
value to the farmer whose land is unimproved, for the careful study 
incident to its preparation can save him money and annoyance. The 
established farmer would do well to prepare plans of his farmstead and 
buildings and to study them carefull}^, with a view to remodeling or 
changing the location of some of his equipment in order to increase 
the efficiency of his plant. 



CHAPTER X 
FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 

Fencing Equipment^^ 

The enormous extent of farm-fence construction by the farmers of 
the United States can best be shown by the use of figures given in 
the reports of the last census, combined with data obtained in the 
studies of the Federal Office of Farm Management. In 1909 there were 
6,361,502 farms in the United States, averaging 138.1 acres each. It 
has been found that the average 140-acre farm requires 6 rods of fence 
to the acre, or a total of 826.6 rods to the farm. This would mean 
that there were in round numbers 5,271,000,000 rods or 16,472,000 
miles of fence in use in the United States in 1909. This amount of 
fence would encircle the earth about 659 times. ^^ 

Kinds of Fencing Used in the United States. — The percentage of the 
different kinds of fence used in selected areas is shown in Table 50 and 
will give an idea of the range in types. 



Table 50. — Percentage of Fence Types Used in Various Localities 



Area 



Wide 

woven 

wire, 

per 

cent 



Narrow 
woven 

wire 

with 
barbed 

wires, 
per 

cent 



Barbed 
and 

smooth 
wire, 
per 
cent 



Hedge, 
per cent 



Types 

of 

wooden 

fencing, 

per 

cent 



Stone 

fence, 

per 

cent 



Western Dakota, Neb- 
raska, Kansas, and north- 
ern Minnesota 

Eastern Dakota, Neb- 
raska, Kansas, and south- 
ern Minnesota 

Iowa 

Missouri 

Wisconsin 

Illinois 

Michigan 

Indiana 

Ohio 



5.5 


10.2 


84.0 


0.03 


0.3 


8.8 


20.0 


63.0 


6.4 


0.6 


8.0 


45.5 


43.5 


2.1 


0.9 


13.8 


49.4 


27.2 


5.6 


3.8 


13.5 


33.4 


49.8 


0.04 


2.3 


11.4 


41.7 


29.0 


12.4 


5.5 


55.9 


11.8 


11.9 


0.6 


19.7 


53.3 


18.0 


12.9 


1.6 


14.1 


59.8 


3.8 


7.0 


1.2 


27.9 



0.0 



0.6 

0.0 

0.04 

0.8 

0.0 

0.0 

0.05 

0.05 



185 



186 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Type of Farming and Size of Farm Determines Fencing. — The kind 
and amount of fence needed on a farm is regulated by the kind of farming 
practiced and the size of the farm. 

Factors influencing the amount of fence are the number and kind of 
stock kept, the pasturage customs, the length of the rotation, and the 
size of the farm. Many farms have fields not easily accessible or too 
rough for cultivation, such fields being often kept permanently in pasture. 
If all the stock is on this permanent pasture during the entire crop 
growing season, economy results, for no division fences are necessary 
between the crop fields. On other farms, small acreages in permanent 
pasture are supplemented by pasture in rotation. Often it is the custom 
to turn stock into the cultivated fields to clean up after the crops have 
been harvested. Pasturing stock entirely on permanent pastures is not 
generally feasible. In order to utilize all farm land to its fullest extent, 
therefore, it is necessary for the average farm to be rather fully fenced. 

Field Arrangement Influences Fencing. — Field arrangement is a large 
factor in the amount of fencing required. Field arrangement in turn is 
governed by the natural topographic conditions of the land, the shape of 
the farm, the roads running through or around it, and the cropping system 
followed. When the farm is located in a hilly or rolling country it is 
essential that the field arrangement be such as to make it as easy as 
possible to work over the uneven land. In a level country, topography 
need not be considered. 

The distribution of fence on the farm, and the effect of farm size upon 
fencing, are shown below. ^^ 



Table 51. — Fence Types 


ON Farms of Different Sizes, North Central States 
(Selected Size Groups) 




Size of farms (acres) 




Kind of fence 


100 and 

under, 

per cent 


141 to 

180, 

per cent 


241 to 

320, 

per cent 


401 to 

600, 

per cent 


1,501 and 

over, 
per cent 


Average 


Road 


24.6 

25.7 

40.7 

1.0 

8.0 


30.9 

23.2 

37.8 

1.5 

6.4 


535.3 

22.3 

35.6 

1.5 

5.4 


34.8 

23.4 

36.1 

1.1 

4.6 


43.4 

20.8 

32.5 

0.7 

2.6 


36.3 


Line 


22.3 


Permanent inside 


35.3 


Temporary inside 

Farmstead 


1.2 

4.9 



It may be noted that as size of farm increases the proportionate 
amount of road fence increases, while that of line or division fence de- 
creases. In other words, the amount of permanent inside and farmstead 
fence is relatively smaller on the larger farms. It will be noticed that 
permanent inside fence constitutes on an average 35.3 per cent of the 
total farm fence, and that there is but 1.2 per cent of temporary inside 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 187 




Fig. 58. Fig. 59. 

58. Neat, well stretched woven wire topped with two barbed wires, on 4 by 4 in. sawed posts, set 
10 ft. apart. Woven wire 48 in. high. Economical, substantial and easily kept. 

59. Zigzag or Virginia split rail fence, common in wooded countries; wasteful of space and harbor for 
pests. 




Fig. 60. Fig. 61. 

60. Neat paling fence on road, of 3 ft. sawed pickets with baseboard and molding set on 4 by 
4 in. sawed posts placed 8 ft. apart, and two 2 by 4 in. stringers. 

61. Stone wall common in rocky countries. Use of stone serves the double purpose of providing 
building materials and clearing fields of loose stone. 




Fig. 62. 



62. Board fence of four 4 by 6 in. boards with 1 by 6 in. caps, fastened to 4 by 5 in. split posts 
set 12 ft. apart with face board. Well built, substantial but rather expensive. 

63. Heavy corral or yard fence, economically possible only in wooded sections where lumber is 
cheap and easy to obtain. A strong fence. 



Figs. 58-63. — Types of farm fence. 



188 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



fence used. In many eases a considerable amount may be saved by the 
use of temporary instead of permanent interior fences. 

Requirements of a Farm Fence. — A farm fence should combine the 
two qualities of service and economy. To give satisfactory service it: 
must be constructed so as to turn all kinds of stock, and that without 
injuring them. To be economical it must be built as cheaply as is con- 
.sistent with durability. The fence erected at a low initial cost is not 
necessarily economical, for it may be short-lived and therefore very 
expensive. 

A certain kind of fence may be economical when erected on one type 
of farm, yet very impractical if used on another type. 

For example, a general farm in Ohio and a cattle ranch in western Dakota, repre- 
senting widely varying conditions. The Ohio farm averages about 90 acres, of which 
70 acres are in crops. Cattle, horses, swine, and sheep are pastured on this farm, and 
the entire farm is often pastured at some time during the year. The fence, therefore, 
must be a general-purpose one arid adequate to meet the varying requirements. 
Woven wire is best suited to such conditions. A barbed-wire fence here would require 
so many wires as to make its first cost nearly equal to that of a good woven-wire fence, 
while its cost of upkeep would be much greater. In addition, it means constant danger 
of injury to stock. The farmers in Ohio have mostly abandoned the use of barbed 
wire. 

Conditions in western Dakota are radically different. On the stock ranches 
comparatively little land is in crops, while large acreages are devoted to permanent 
pasture. The stock are mostly cattle, and they are kept on pasture much of the year. 
Barbed-wire fences sufficient to turn cattle can be much more cheaply constructed 
than woven-wire fences, and under the conditions prevailing in Dakota are nearly as 
satisfactory. Even if a few steers are lost as a result of wire cuts, their saving would go 
but a short way toward balancing the higher cost of building and maintaining woven- 
wire fences. 

Gates. — The number of farm gates is an item of no little importance. 
The number of gates used on farms of varying sizes in Indiana, Michigan, 
Wisconsin, and Illinois is shown below. 

Table 52. — Gates Required on Farms of Different Sizes 



Acreage grouping 



Average 
acreage 



Number of 

gates per 

farm 



Rods fencing 
per gate 



100 and under. 

101 to 140 

141 to 180 

181 to 240 

241 to 320 

321 to 400 

401 to 600 

601 to 1,000. . . 
1,001 to 1,500. 
1,501 and over 



78.5 
124.1 
166.0 
212.3 
286.3 
360.0 
479.4 
740.7 
1,151.3 
2,047.1 



9.9 
12.7 
14.3 
16.6 
19.2 
21.6 
29.2 
32.6 
52.9 
40.9 



61.50 
64.60 
67.60 
69.30 
71.70 
75.10 
73.00 

110.30 
83.80 

119.10 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 189 

The larger farms not oniy require less fence to the acre but they also 
require fewer gates for a given amount of fence. There is an average of 
one gate to every 61.5 rods of fence on the smallest farms, as compared 
with one to 119.1 on the largest and to 71.2 on all farms. The average 
value of gates is $3.27 each. 

Life of and Test for Wire Fencing. — The cost and the life of the various 
styles of woven-wire fencing differ greatly. Many purchasers consider 
the first cost of the various kinds to such an extent that they lose sight 
of the difference in their length of service, which is the factor controlling 
their ultimate cost. The following table has been computed from the 
experience of a large number of farmers in the use of different styles of 
fencing, and shows the relative durability of the different weights and 
heights of woven wire. 

Table 53. — Relative Amount of Service Given by Different Weights op 

Woven-wire Fabric 





Number 


Average 




Number 


Average 


Size of wire 


of esti- 


life. 


Size of wire 


of esti- 


life. 




mates 


years 




mates 


years 


No. 9 throughout 


637 


21.1 


No. 9 top and bot- 






No. 7 top. No. 9 bottom, 






tom, No. 11 later- 






laterals and stays. No. 






als. No. 12 stays. . 


53 


17.7 


11 or No. 12 


35 


20.3 


No. 10 top and bot- 






No. 9 top and bottom, 






tom. No. 11 later- 






No. 10 laterals and 






als and stays 


23 


16.7 


stays 


73 


18.0 


No. 11 top and bot- 






No. 9 top and bottom, 






tom, No. 12 laterals 






No. 11 laterals and 






and stays 


43 


14.6 


stays 


490 


17.5 


No. 12 top and bot- 






No. 9 top and bottom, 






bo. No. 14 laterals 






No. 12 laterals and 






and stays 


46 


12.7 


stays 


349 


17.4 









Table 54. — Relative Amount of Service in Years Given by Different Widths 

OF Woven-wire Fabric 



Height of fence, inches 


26 


32 


36 


39 


42 47 


55 


Number of estimates 

Life of wire, years 


206.0 
17.0 


214 
17 


19.0 
18.3 


247.0 

18.8 


42.0 
19.9 


865.0 
18.9 


156.0 
21.7 



It is becoming generally recognized that the heavier styles of woven- 
wire fencing are more economical. The initial cost of the heavy wire 
is greater, but it lasts more than enough longer to offset the additional 



190 FARM MANAGEMENT 

cost. It costs practically as much to construct a fence in which a 
light grade of woven wire is used as to build one of the heavier wire; 
and as the heavy material lasts much longer the cost of construction 
is distributed over a longer time, hence it is less per year. And during 
the life of the two types of fence the repair costs of the heavier fencing 
are less. The percentage of heavy wire manufactured and sold for 
fencing purposes has greatly increased in the last five years. The use 
of the wider styles of woven fence has become more general. But it 
has been the experience of farmers that they are more expensive to 
maintain, as animals get their heads under the surmounted barbed wires 
and crowd down the woven wire. This is especially true where large 
hogs come into contact with these fences. The preceding table shows the 
higher fence has the longer life. 

Posts. — In the construction of a fence the selection of posts is very 
important. Cheapness of posts will vary with local conditions. The 
kinds of native timber and their costs must be considered. It is not 
advisable to construct a permanent wire fence on posts that will not last 
as long as the wire. 

Table 55. — Average Life of Different Kinds of Fence Posts, 4 In. 

IN Diameter 

Years 

Osage orange 29 . 9 

Locust 23.8 

Red cedar 20.5 

Mulberry 17.4 

Catalpa 15.5 

Bur oak 15 . 3 

Chestnut 14 . 8 

White cedar 14 . 3 

Wahiut 11.5 

White oak 11.4 

Pine 11.2 

Tamarack 10 . 5 

Cherry 10.3 

Hemlock 9.1 

Sassafras 8.9 

Elm 8.8 

Ash 8.6 . 

Red oak 7.0 

WUlow 6.2 

Concrete (estimated) . 48 . 

Stone 36.3 

Steel (estimated) 29. 9 

The life of posts is, of course, influenced by size, seasoning, preserving, 
quality of timber, soil, climate, and kind of stock to be fenced, but the 
table shows something of the relative length of life. 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 191 

Work Stock 

Work Animals. — A well-broken mule is in many respects the best 
work animal obtainable. Emphasis should be placed upon "well-broken. " 
The mule combines intelligence, strength, vitality, ease and economy in 
keeping. It will stand more abuse than a horse. As to the greater in- 
telligence of the mule over the horse, one will almost never see a runaway 
mule get into a barbed wire fence, A team of 10 mules will weave around 
and around in a perfect tangle, yet straighten itself out with no assistance. 
A mule knows when quitting time comes: if overloaded, a mule won't 
kiU himself straining, after he finds he can't budge his load on reasonable 
trial, a mule won't walk on an unsafe bridge. 

On the other hand, one will go far to find a meaner more cantank- 
erous pest than a mule made cranky by improper breeding or bj^ poor 
handling at the time of breaking. Such combine fear, bridle-shyness, 
balkiness, and about every other equine sin. 

Character of Farm Work Determines Type of Work Animals. — The 
nature of work required of stock will largely determine the kind that 
should be obtained. If a general all-round team is wanted to do road 
work, field work, various farm operations, and perhaps a little driving, 
I favor the 1,200-lb. horse, not too big and ungainly, nor too lank}' and 
small boned. He should be neither too much of a clod, nor too long 
legged. The close-coupled, big-chested, chunky, stout-legged fellow 
will prove a desirable choice. 

On the other hand, where the stock is to be worked only in light 
operations, one can use under- weight, oflf -grade stuff, and even young 
stock. 

For long term, continuous plowing, the heavier, sound, solid animals, 
able to stand the long strain, are needed. 

Extremes in Work Animals Not Desirable. — For general work, it will 
not pay any farmer to run to either extreme. The light animals cost 
almost as much per head to care for as larger stock, and yet can not do 
the heavier work. The big heavy stock waste too much time getting 
around and are liable to go lame when on the road. 

Horses trained to fast walking are more profitable than slow animals, 
provided the gain in speed is not made at the expense of vitality, weight, 
or strength. This applies not only to road, plow, cultivator, and harrow 
teams, but to stock on mowers, rakes, scrapers, excavators, harvesters, 
and the like, provided the animals walk steadily and evenly. 

For the lighter work — scraping, harrowing, raking, haj- wagons, etc. — 
use the lighter, weaker class of stock (if one has such to work) and mares 
well along in foal. 

Poor Work Animals Uneconomical. — It costs more to do farm work 
with poor, half-starved, run down, weak, lame work stock than with good 



192 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



animals. The cost of keeping 10 good head is but little more than the 
cost of keeping 10 scrubs. Moreover, when one starts out with a good 




Fig. 64. — A Maine scene (March, 1919). 




Fig. 65. — Woikstock on California farm. 




Fig. 66. — Lone line teams reduce manpower bvit increase stock needs. This scene 
shows teams hauhng 5 to 6 tons of sugar beets to the load. 

Types of workstock. 

team, he accomplishes more in a day than with a poor one. The old 
adage *'A chain is only as strong as its weakest link" certainly applies to 
the team made up of six or more animals. The loss in turning, the rest 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 193 

required to keep the weakest animal going, the loss of heart experienced 
by the driver of a sluggard team, or the time lost in hitching or working 
with outlaw stock will figure into a goodly item of waste. 

Mating Teams. — In this connection may be mentioned the necessity 
of properly mating teams in order to eliminate waste effort. The smaller 
the numbers in a team, the more efficient will be the work. Traits of 
disposition, rates of traveling, strength, build, stamina, age, and vitality, 
vary so in different animals that a careful study of the teams in action 
must be made. In lining up work teams they should be matched to 
secure in each span as nearly as possible equal qualities. 

Working Stock. — Men should be watched when working stock. They 
should never be permitted to abuse the animals by swearing, kicking, or 
otherwise. A lover of horses won't stand by and see a big brute of a man 
grab a horse by the bit and kick him in the sides to the tune of a torrent- 
of cuss words. It helps neither the man nor the animal and it may do 
harm, especially if it be a colt new to the work, still a bit heedless because 
of immaturity, or a mare in foal. 

Number of Work Animals Required. — On a farm of 160 acres, four 
animals are ordinarily requii'ed to do the work. Five horses would per- 
mit the raising of colts from two of them. 

In the United States one horse is kept, on the average, for every 30 
acres of improved land. 

Implements and Machinery 

Implements and machinery constitute items of equipment which 
require care in selection. 

Factors Determining Implement and Machinery Equipment. — In line 
with the factors governing choice of equipment, which have already been 
pointed out, lists of implement needs vary according to the six items of 
(1) type of business, (2) soils, (3) size of outfit, (4) capital, (5) personal 
taste, and (6) local customs. 

Influence of Type of Business on Implement and Machinery Equipment. 
On the cattle ranch, for instance, the riding stock, saddles, bridles, 
branding irons, fence building and repairing equipment, and implements 
for raising hay, grain, or other feeds, are radically different from the equip- 
ment needed in poultry production. A farm given over to barley, corn, 
and alfalfa will require altogether different types and sizes of equipment 
from that of a farm concentrating on fruit. 

Influence of Soils on Implement and Machinery Equipment. — The influ- 
ence of soil upon types of equipment can be readily noted by comparing 
the more lightly constructed implements used in sandy soils with the 
stronger, heavier implements used in gumbos and adobes. Presence of 
rocks or roots may necessitate a disc plow rather than a mold-board plow. 
Steep slopes may demand a side-hill plow, a quite different implement from 
the plow of level lands. 
13 



194 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Influence of Size of Outfit on Implement and Machinery Equipment. — 
Size of outfit may eliminate the possibility of tractors and necessitate 
use of work stock, the latter requiring lighter implements than the former. 
Again, size may justify the purchase of harvesters, baling apparatus, 
milking machines, and similar labor-saving devices profitable in a large 
business but extravagant for the small outfit. 

Influence of Capital on Implement and Machinery Equipment. — Capital 
may necessitate use of second hand equipment rather than better 
new equipment; or capital may require purchase of less desirable types of 
equipment than would be warranted if ample capital were available. 




Fig. 67. — Implements and machinery comprise a large and varied assortment for 

most farm business. 

Influence of Personal Taste on Implement and Machinery Equipment. — 
Personal taste is reflected in desire for certain makes of implements or 
types of equipment wherever a choice is possible. For instance, some 
men prefer tractors to horses, and other things being equal, will equip 
with machinery rather than with live stock. Certain workers have a 
preference for certain makes of mowing machines, rakes, plows, etc. 

Influence of Local Custom on Implement and Machinery Equipment. — 
Local custom is reflected in the choice of equipment in that the methods 
employed in a given community may fix the kind of equipment which 
must be procured. Thus, in some communities the practice continues 
of plowing with Stockton gang plows even though other plow types are to 
be preferred, the use of one- or two-horse equipment even though doubling 
up is possible with a resulting saving of man power; stacking of hay in the 
open by hand, pitching to wagons and unloading by means of the Jack- 
son fork, or use of rope slings and derricks. Men do better with equip- 
ment in which they have faith and with which they are familiar. Local 
custom will therefore be of moment in selecting equipment if hired help 
must be relied upon. 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 195 



6 

t 

O 



W o 






hH CE 



to 
o 

1- 
o 
o 
















A 

III 

y ~ 






en 














< 










i ■ 

?5 1 - 




_l 
Z> 
-> 


i; T3-0 ^e? 






p C- 

liii 


|l 
It- 

^ z- 

y5 


f 1^ 




f 2 


UJ 

Z 

r) 
-> 




■gas 




i 01 


i ^ 

i< 

"to 

3- 

Vx 
y (XI 


III. 

3wa. 






> 
< 




3S2 


»3J g s ■ 




A Ao 
: "O ; s? 

Eg li. 






_l 

D. 
< 




U) lis 


X 














X 

< 


yS y5 "v^5 








>- 

a: 
< 

z> 
ir 

CO 










A^ A^A A-o 
i» S 'f S fe;:?c^ 


> 
< 

Z 
< 






A 

is 

V ~ 






z: 

UJ 
UJ 

o 






/ 

c 
1 








',^— -< ■" 










CD 
UJ 

> 

o 

z 


c 
a 


< 


00 ^ 
? @ 




^lo 1- S " 
o^x ~g-° 




1 x-^ r S 


IP 


< ii ^ 

(O g 


iS5 



s 
1 




3> U) 
< 


M 

1 


s - ^1 


1 

>« , , .... . J= 



196 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Use of a Calendar of Operations in Estimating Implement and 
Machinery Equipment. — Determination of equipment for any given 
farm business depends mostly upon determination of the kinds and 
amounts of crops to be grown. These once decided, a list can be drawn 
up to cover the implements needed to do the work within the time limits 
available for the various operations with respect to size of outfit and 
capacity of implements. In this connection a calendar of operations is 
useful. 

The way to make one is to draw up in detail the various methods 
to be followed in putting in crops or caring for stock, the time available 
for the work, and the usual size of outfit best suited to do it. 

Example of Use of Calendar of Operations in Determining Implement and Machinery 
Equipment. — The following example shows such a calendar for a 240-acre western 
farm laid out for the production of 160 acres of barley, 60 acres of alfalfa for hay, 5 
acres each of corn for silage and of stock beets, and of 10 acres of beans. 

Number of Work Animals for This 240-acre Farm. — A study of the 
preceding calendar with reference to the work stock required with a 
given size of outfit results as follows: 



Table 57. — Number of Work Animals Needed for the 240-acre Farm 



Month 



Number of work 
days available 



Size of outfit, 
horses 



Number of work 

days required for 

all work 



Number of work 
stock required 



Nov. or 
Dec... 
Jan .... 
Feb.... 

March. 

Apr. . . . 

May. . . 

June. . . 

July. . . 

Aug.. . . 

Sept.... 

Oct.. . . 



20 
18 
16 
20 

22 

26 

26 

26 

26 

26 

26 

26 



38 



33% 
3 

'A 

5 

1 

3 
13 

3 
15 

3 

18 

4 

3 
13 

3 

3 

3 

201-9 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 197 

Thus six head can handle the work, and will be the minimum 
number-under the conditions of the particular farm. 

Implement and Machinery Needs for This 240-acre Farm. — It follows 
that the list of equipment depends on the size of the work stock unit, the 
speed with which the work must be done, and local custom in preparing 
for, putting in, and caring for a crop. 

Implement Needs of Barley. — Starting with the barley, as representing 
the greatest need for implement equipment, the 160 acres will necessitate 
under the work conditions of this particular project: 

(a) A 4:-gang 12-iii. moldboard plow. 
(6) An 8-ft. disk harrow. 

(c) An 18-ft. spike tooth harrow (in four sections). 
. (d) A 12-ft. grain drill, 
(e) A 5-ft. mowing machine. 
(/) A 12-ft. horse rake. 
(g) A 2,1/^-ton running gear with bed. 

Additional Equipment Needs of Other Crops. 

(i) A stacker, complete with mast, fork, and rope. 
Renovation can be taken care of with the other equipment. 

The beans require in addition to such of the preceding equipment as 
can be used for this crop: 

ij) A 2-gang 12-in. moldboard plow. 

(fc) A 10-ft. home made plank dray. 

(l) A 12-in. walking plow. 

(m) A 2-row bean planter equipped for beans, corn, or beets. 

(n) An adjustable cultivator, utilizable for beans, corn, or beets 

(o) A bean cutter for harvesting. 

There will be also required for the crop work: 

{a) Harness. 

(b) Eveners, doubletrees, and neck yokes. 

(c) Knives for the corn harvest. 

(d) Thinning hoes for the beets, 
(c) Pitchforks for the hay. 

(J) Shovels for irrigating. 

The corn and beet crops require no additional equipment beyond that 
already provided for. 

Value of Calendars of Operations in Determining Implement and 
Machinery Needs. — Similar charts for proposed businesses are a help in 
visualizing the types, numbers, and kinds of farm implements and the 
number of animals needed. The working out of details of such charts 
results in a better understanding of the minimum amount required and 
of the probable necessary investment. 



198 FARM MANAGEMENT 

In the various determinations full justification must be secured 
after the manner already explained at length* before any item is included. 

Special and Minor Equipment 

Special and Minor Equipment. — Under this heading are to be included 
the cans, separator, cooler, feeding apparatus, milking stools, and other 
minor equipment required upon a dairy; the pruning shears, fruit trays, 
picking baskets, ladders, spraying outfit, and similar equipment needed 
in the fruit business; the egg scales, collecting baskets, water fountains, 
feeding apparatus, storage quarters, and special equipment needed in the 
poultry business. 

What Constitutes Minor Equipment. — In selecting the minor tools 
to equip a farm, provision must be made for the articles needed for the 
care and repair of buildings, fences, machinery, etc., the care of live stock, 
the production of crops, and the various other interests of the farm. 
With every change in the type of farm, involving a new combination of 
enterprises, a change in minor equipment will be necessary. For each 
of the many specialized types of farms certain articles will be needed 
which will not be found necessary on general farms. 

Example of List of Minor Equipment, — An idea of the number, 
variety and kind of minor articles of farm equipment can be gathered from 
a study of 38 Ohio general farms. ^^ 

Table 58. — Minor Equipment Found on Ohio Farms 

Items Number Items Number 

Needed Needed 

General purpose General purpose 

Anvil 1 File (flat) 2 

Auger handle 1 File (round) 1 

Auger bits . . : Set of 6 File (taper) 2 

Ax 2 Forge 

Ax (hand) 1 Grindstone 

Awl t Grubbing hoe 

Barrel 1 Hammer (claw) 

Basket 1 Hammer (rivet) 

Bell (farm) 1 Hammer (sledge) 

Bench screw 1 Hatchet 

Brace and bits 1 Hoisting block 

Brush hook or scythe 1 Jackscrew 

Chalk line 1 Ladder 

Chisel (cold) 2 Ladder (step) 

Chisel (wood) 4 Lantern 

Compasses 1 Level 

Ditch cleaner 1 Machine oil 1 ga 

Drawing knife 1 Mallet (wood) 

Drill press 1 Mattock 

Drills 4 Maul 



'See pages 155 to 160. 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 199 



Table 58. — Minor Equipment Found on Ohio Farms. (Continued) 



Items 

General purpose 

Nippers (farrier's) 

Oil can 

Padlock 

Paint brush 

Pick 

Pinch bar 

Pliers 

Pincers (carpenter's) 

Plane 

Punch 

Post-hole digger 

Rasp 

Sand sieve .• . 

Saw (buck) 

Saw (compass) 

Saw (crosscut) 

Saw (hack) 

Saw (hand) 

Saw (set) 

Scale (counter) 

Scale (farm) 

Scale (spring) 

Scale (steelyard) 

Scratch gauge 

Screw driver 

Screw plate 

Shovel 

Shovel (round pointed) 

Tinner's snips 

Spade (tile) 

Square (bevel) 

Square (steel) 

Square (try) 

Tape line 

Trap (rat) 



Number Items 



Needed 



Number 
Needed 
General purpose 

Trap (steel) i 

Trowel (brick) l 

Trowel (plastering) i 

Tongs 1 

Tool grinder l 

Vise 1 

Wedge (iron) 2 

Whetstone 2 

Wliitewash brush i 

Wire splicer i 

Wire stretcher 1 

Wrench (pipe) 1 

Wrench (monkey) 2 

Household and farm 

Hoe 2 

Hog scraper 2 

Hog hook 1 

Kettle 1 

Lard press and sausage stuff er 1 

Lawn mower 1 

Tree pruner i 



Pruning shears. 
Rake (garden). 
Rake (lawn) . . . 

Spade 

Sprinkler 

Trowel 



All live stock 

Broom 2 

Clipping machine 1 

Hand sprayer 1 

Manure fork 2 

Pail 3 



Additional Minor Equipment. — The following supplemental list 
prepared by sifting suggestions submitted by farmers scattered through- 
out the country, will be found to include certain tools which though 
not essential, perhaps, are useful items of equipment for the average 
farm: 



Assortment of machine and carriage bolts. 

Bag truck. 

Bolt cutters. 

Gasoline blow torch. 

Harness repairing outfit. 

Pipe cutters. 



Pipe stocks and dies. 
Pipe tongs. 
Pipe vise. 
Soldering outfit. 
Staple puller. 
Wrecking tool. 



200 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Costs of Minor Equipment. — The costs of these items, priced at the 
time of study (1916), amounted to: 

For general purposes 

Essential $ 57.45 

Desirable but not essential 81 . 15 

Total $138. 70 

For household and farm 

Essential % 7 . 70 

Desirable but not essential 8 . 00 

$ 15.70 
For live stock 

Essential $ 6 . 85 

Desirable but not essential 10 . 00 

$ 16.85 
For horse and driving 

Essential $ 16 . 65 

For cattle 

Desirable but not essential $ 6 . 45 

For dairy 

Essential $ 9 . 95 

Examples of Lists of Total Equipment 

As illustrations, lists are presented below for five selected types of 
farming, to show the equipment variations due to different kinds of 
agriculture and something of the extent of equipment needed. 

1. List of Equipment for 20 Acres of Fruit Orchard. 

Buildings 150-gal. spray outfit 

Dwelling Pitch fork 

Windmill, well, tank and tank house Hoe 

Horse barn, 12 by 20 ft. • Pruning saw 

Blacksmith shop and implement shed 1 pair 30- in. pruning shears 

Pgnces ^ ladders, 10-14 ft. 

For entire ranch (3 strands barbed 6 3-gal. picking buckets 

wire, posts 1% rods apart) 1,000 trays 
Implements arid Machinery 

12-in. walking plow 

10-in. walking plow 

9-ft. spike tooth harrow „ ^ •. ^ i r i • i 

^ ,.,,,, „ 2 fruit trucks for drymg house 

2-sect. sprmg tooth harrow ^ . , , 

„ J,, J. , Cuttmg shed 

6-ft. disc harrow _ ° , 

-J,, i. J 11 2-ton road wagon 

5-ft. corrugated roller 

9-ft. plank drag (home-made) buggy 

Fresno Scraper ^^'"^ ^^<^<^^ «^^ Harness 

Double and single trees, ropes, halters, Team and harness 

etc. Live Stock other than Work Stock 

IJ^-ton fruit truck Poultry 



800 lug boxes 40-lb. 

Sulfur house 

Pick 

2 shovels 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 201 



Examples of Lists of Total Equipment {Continued) 



Special Equipment 
Piping to buildings 

2. List of Equipment for 20-cow Dairy 
Dairy producing butter fat 

Buildings 

Dwelling 

Windmill, well, tank and tank house 

Hay (100 ton) and horse barn and 
corrals 

Cow barn (28 by 40 ft.) with cement 
floor and corrals 

Wood silo (14 by 20 ft.) 

Blacksmith shop and implement shed 

Milk room 
Fences 

Around farm (3 strands barbed wire, 
posts \yi rods apart). 

Implements and Machinery 
12-in. walking plow 
9-ft. spike tooth harrow 
Fresno scraper 
5-ft. mower 
10-ft. rake 
IJ-^-ton wagon 
Hay rack 

2 shovels 

3 pitchforks 
Double and single trees, ropes, halters, 

etc. 

Spring wagon and single harness 

Work Stock and Harness 
2 work horses and harness 
Driving or riding horse and harness 

3. List of Equipment for Grain Ranch 

Buildings. 
Dwelling 

Windmill, well, tank and tank house 
Hay and horse barn 
Implement shed and blacksmith shop 

Fences 

For entire farm (3 strands barbed wire, 
posts 13^ rods apart) 

Implements and Machinery 
1 Stockton gang plow 
1 spike tooth harrow, 4-sect. 
1 grain driU 



Small Tools and Shop Material 

Nails, nuts, bolts, iron, lumber, etc. 
Small tools 

Farm (on Alfalfa). 

Live Stock other than Work Stock 
20 cows 

1 bull 

Special Equipment 
Piping to buildings 
Cesspool and sewer 

2 drinking troughs 
Wheelbarrow 
16-bu. feeding truck 
40-ft. hose 

2 barn shovels 
2 brooms 
2 hoes 

2 stable forks 
Jackson hay fork 
2 milk stools 
2 20-qt. pails 
2-compartment wash sink 
2 h.p. boiler 

20-ft. 8-in. stack; roof plates; spark 
arrester and damper 
Large separator 
1 dozen brushes 
Keg washing powder 
Ideal sanitary cream cooler 
Babcock tester 
Scales 

Small Tools and Shop Material 
Material, as nails, nuts, bolts, scrap 
iron lumber, etc. 

Small tools and blacksmith outfit 

(320 Acres). 

1 grain binder 
1 mower, 5-ft. 
1 hay rake, 10-ft. 
1 Jackson fork 
1 hauling wagon 

1 cart 

2 hay racks 
6 pitchforks 

1 post hole auger 
1 wire stretcher 
1 shovel 

1 Fresno scraper 
Lead bars 



202 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Examples of Lists of Total Equipment (Continued) 



Work Animals and Harness 

8 work horses, collars and harness 

1 driving horse and harness 

Live Stock other than Work Animals 
Poultry and cow 

Special Equipm,ent 

2 manure forks 
1 broom 



1 wheelbarrow 

1 drinking trough 

Piping to buildings 

Incidentals as rope, halters, buckets, 
etc. 
Small Tools and Shop Material 

Blacksmith outfit and small tools 

Shop material — nails, bolts, iron, 
lumber, etc. 



4. List of Equipment for 2,500-fowl Poultry Plant. — Greater variety and individ- 
uality are expressed in the poultry business than in almost any other farming. 
There is no hard and fast rule covering either equipment or type of houses. 
The following is. however, reasonably typical when white leghorns are run in flocks 
of 500 each. 



Buildings 

Dwelling 

Windmill, well, tank and tank house 

Hay and horse barn and implement 
shed 

5 flock houses, 50 by 18 ft. 

2 wooden houses, 34 by 16 ft. 
Fences 

5-ft. woven wire, posts 1 rod apart 
Implements and Machinery 

10-in. walking plow 

1-sect. spike tooth harrow 

Cultivator 

Hoe 

Shovel 

Scythe 

Rake 

Spade 

Post hole auger 

Wire stretcher 

Low yard truck 

Scraper 
Work Ajiimals and Harness 

Horse 

Harness 

5. List of Equipment for a 60-acre Farm. — This western farm consists of 60 acres 
of land under a community cooperative ditch from which water can be obtained when- 
ever needed at the rate of $2 per acre per year. The land has never been under irri- 
gation, is of average quality, and situated from standpoint of climate, soil, and 
market so that best results will follow its use for; 

35 acres of alfalfa for dairy, hogs, and hay 
10 acres for almonds 
10 acres for prunes 
2 acres for corn for silo. Remainder for corrals and buildings. 



Live Stock Other than Work Animals 
1,200 6-month pullets 
3,200 chicks 

Special Equipment 
42 feeding troughs 

3 watering troughs 
Broom 

Hand sprayer (for inside) 

Power mixer 

Kale cutter 

30 feed buckets (wood) 

Scoopshovel 

Wheelbarrow, hand wagon or sled 

Grinder 

Cooking pot 

6 egg buckets (wood) 

6 dozen glass eggs 

4 dozen 36-dozen egg cases 
2 distill distillate heaters 

6 drinking fountains 
Water system and piping 

Small Tools and Shop Material 

Small tools, lumber, and shop 
materials 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 203 

The alfalfa is to be utilized for a 10-cow dairy and 10 brood sows. Concentrates 
will be purchased. Land will produce at the rate of 6 tons of alfalfa hay, 12 tons of 
corn silage, and good yields of remaining crops. 

The cows are to be pastured on alfalfa from April 1 to December 1 and fed 4 lb. 
of concentrates per head at all times when milking. From December 1 to April 1 
they are to be fed 20 lb. of alfalfa hay and 30 lb. corn silage. 

The swine are to be pastured at usual rate on the alfalfa throughout the year, — on 
poorest portion in winter. 

Ranch can sell either whole milk or butter-fat. 

Land in its present state without checks or improvements of any kind, is valued 
at $200 per acre where orchards are to be set out and at $125 for remainder. 

A determination of the amounts, kinds, and types of equipment necessary prop- 
erly to conduct the business resulted in findings as follows 

Dwelling Shop 

Horse barn for 4 horses Small hen house 

Granary Silo 

Harness room Farrowing pens for sows 

Hay storage Field shelters for hogs 

Milking barn Field shelters for cows 

Implement shed Well, tank, windmill and tower 

Shed for use in fruit harvest and for Ditch boxes 

storage of drying trays and boxes when Sanitary necessities 

not in use. Sewer and cesspool 

Piping — ^from tank to house, stock troughs and gardens. 

Dwelling to be of five rooms, moderate priced, as usually constructed. 
For purposes of convenience and economy, the hay storage for horses, horse barn, 
implement shed, storage for grain, spare harness room, and shop will be combined 
in one structure. 

Figuring hay for four work horses at 30 lb. per day and counting on storing 
6 months' supply (at other times put in one or two months' supply from 
harvest field), is needed for 12 tons. At 512 cu. ft. per ton, 6,144 cu. ft. 
are required. 
Horse stalls to be 2-ft. double stalls— 8 by 10 ft. including mangers, with a 
6-ft. walk behind the stock. Implement shed shall provide about 300 
sq. ft. of floor space. Shop to be 10 by 10 ft. ; grain storage 10 by 14 ft. 
These needs will be best met by a structure 28 by 52 ft., with main barn having 
a floor space of 20 by 28 ft. and 10 ft. to eaves, with two wings attached running 
the length of the barn and 16 ft. in width. 
Milking barn to provide for 10 cows, i.e., stalls 3J^ by 5 ft. with 2-ft. manger, 
1-ft. gutter, and 4-ft. walk. Concrete floor. 7 ft. at eaves rear of cow, hip 
or A-roof and 8 ft. at feed end, roof pitch = 34, shingle roof, pine framing and 
redwood siding, size 12 by 36 ft. Cow hay to be stored in the open. Feeding 
to be done from outside. 
Hen house for 25 fowls at 3 sq. ft. per fowl = 75 sq. ft. or small building 8 by 10 ft., 
shed roof, 5 ft. in rear to eaves, pitch of J^, hence 7 ft. in front, wire in front with 
board floor and conveniences for cleaning out and collecting eggs. Tar-paper 
roof. 
One shed will serve double purpose for use during fruit harvest and to store boxes 
and trays when not in use. For the purpose, a shed 12 by 16 ft. will be ample, 
built on wooden sills 2 by 6 in., 4 by 4-in. posts, 6 or 8 ft. apart, 7 ft. from ground 



204 FARM MANAGEMENT 

to eaves at rear, shed roof, i^.pitch, boarded at rear and both ends, shingle with 
5-in. lap, floor of 1 by 8-in. pine on 2 by 4-in. this joists set on ground. 
Silo 

Since cows are fed 30 lb. ensilage for 4 months, this = 2 tons by 10 = 20-ton silo 
needed. Silo 10 by, 20 ft. = 26 tons. 
Farrowing Pens 

2 rows of five each separated by 4-ft. alley. Pens to be 8 by 8 ft. in size, boarded 
up solid with 1 by 6-in. pine, all to be roofed over with shake roof, enclosed on one 
side, but open on other side and ends. Each inside pen to connect with outside 
pen 8 by 12 ft. long, built of 1 by 6-in. spaced 4 in. apart. Floors to be of 
earth, except a strip of 3 ft. wide across and near alley for feeding floor. 
Field Shelter for Hogs 

To be iO by 16-ft. shed roof, 3^ pitch, and 4 ft. to eaves to rear, roofed with battened 
boards and boarded in at rear and both ends, mounted on 3 by 6-in. runners and 
braced to permit moving. 
Well, Tank, Windmill and Tower 

Usual domestic well, i.e., 50 ft. deep, tank, windmill and tower. 
Ditch boxes 

To be placed only at ditch take-outs — banks to be cut to let water into checks. 
For 60 acres if checks are 50 by 200 ft. and in even series, seven ditches needed, 
or eight take-outs including one where water enters ranch. Ditch requires 
structure 12 ft. long, 6 ft. high, with wings 4 ft. long and 6 ft. deep and base 4 ft. 
wide and 6 ft. long for each ditch. Total, seven double structures. 
Fences 
Needs 

Around fruit 

Around alfalfa hay and pasture field 
Horse corral 
Poultry yard 
Around farmstead 
Kinds 

For hog corrals 

3 barb wires, 26-in. woven wire, on posts 16 ft. apart with two pickets 
between (to be called fence No. 1). 
For pastures, cow corrals, hay fields, and fruit 

Four strands barbed wire on posts 16 ft. apart with one picket between 
(to be called fence No. 2), 
Horse corral fence 

96 ft. square of 2 by 8-in., 1 ft. apart, 6 ft. high, 4 X 4 — 8 posts spaced 
8 ft. apart (to be called fence No. 3) set 2}4. ft- in ground. 
Poultry fence 

6 ft. high of woven wire placed on 2 by 4-in. posts, 12 ft. apart, with 1 by 
6-in. baseboard to enclose space 48 by 96 ft. (to be called fence No. 4). 
Farmstead fence 

Board fence of four 1 by 6-in. boards spaced 12 in. apart on square 4 by 4 in. 
posts, set 12 ft. apart (fence No. 5). 
Lengths required — (based on layout plan) 

Number 1 — 2 , 640 running feet 
2 — 9 , 380 running feet 

3 — 400 running feet 

4 — 300 running feet 
5 — 1 , 150 running feet 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 205 



Fruit Trees 

550 each almonds and prunes 
Work Slock 

4 work horses 
Live Stock 

25 hens 

10 milk cows 
1 bull 

10 sows 
1 boar 

Implements and Machinery 

1 14-in. walking plow 

1 10-in. walking plow 

1 8-ft. spike tooth harrow 

1 4-ft. disc harrow 

1 spring tooth harrow 

1 plank drag 

1 buggy 

1 orchard wagon 

1 light spring wagon 

1 13^^ ton wagon with flat rack and 
hay rack 

1 hand spraying machine 

1 2-horse cultivator 

1 2-horse Fresno scraper 

1 5-ft. mower 

1 10-ft. rake 

1 hand corn planter 

1 Jackson fork and derrick 
Miscellaneous Equipment 

2 shovels 

3 pitchforks 
Pick 

Double trees, single trees, lead bars, 
and eveners 
Rake 

Post hole auger 
Wire stretcher 

4 halters 
25 lb. rope 
Wagon jack 

Curry comb and brush 



Horse brush 

2 corn knives 

10 feeding troughs for hogs (home 
made) 

2 feed racks for dairy corral (home 
made) 

4 10-gal. milk cans 

2 20-qt. milk pails 

Dipping vat and pens for hogs (home 
made) 

Spade 

10 drinking troughs (for hogs — home 
made) 

2 drinking troughs (for horses and 
cows — home made) 

Wheelbarrow 

16-bu. feeding truck 

40-ft. hose 

Broom 

2 hoes 

1 stable fork 

Milk stool (home made) 

Can brush 

Keg washing powder 

Babcock tester and bottles 

Scales 

2 sets chain harness 
1 set light harness 

1 single harness 

2 sets of canvas for use in almond 
harvest 

2 knocking poles 
Pruning saw 

1 pair 30-in. pruning shears 

2 12-ft. ladders 
400 lug boxes 

600 trays for drying fruit 

(i.e. 30-ton crop in three pickings = 
30 ton green fruit drying at once at 50 lb. 
per tray = 600 trays) 

Dip for prunes 

(Note. — Silage cutter to be rented) 



Carpenter and Blacksmith 0\dfits and Shop Materials 

Carpenter outfit (brace and eight bits, claw hammer, square, try square, 
marking gauge, ripsaw, handsaw, keyhole saw, jack plane, smoothing plane, 
three chisels, level, draw knife, dividers, wood rasp, two screw drivers, wood 
bench and vice with nails and screws). 
Blacksmith outfit (10-lb. sledge, anvil hammer, machinist's ball peen hammer, 
two cold chisels, five punches, center punch, adjustable hacksaw frame, one 
dozen hack-saw blades, 12 twist drills, six assorted files with handles, screw- 
cutting files, straight lip tongs, two bolt tongs, forge with blower, steel-faced 
anvil, iron bench and vice). 



206 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Other tools (soldering tools, harness repair tools, two monkey wrenches, 5 S- 
wrenches, wire cutting pliers, pipe-threading outfit, single-wheel pipe cutter, 
two Stillson pipe wrenches, open-hinge pipe vice, pinch-point steel crowbar, 
trowel for concrete work, pointing trowel, sidewalk edger, sidewalk groover, 
putty knife, glass cutter, melting ladle for babbitting, babbitt metal, assorted 
paint brushes, grindstone, axe). 
Personal Effects 

Furnishings for house 
Special Equipment 

40 fruit trees for family orchard 

20 ornamental trees. 

Desirability of Second-hand Equipment. — The buying of second-hand 
equipment is frequently considered by the man short of capital and anxi- 
ous to make every dollar count. This applies not only to implements and 
machinery but to old horses, worn-out cows, and second-hand dairy 
supplies. 

In general the first wear is the most profitable. The older things 
become, the greater is the lost motion; parts break more frequently, and 
the rate of wear increases. 

How much one can afford to pay for such second-hand things depends 
on the usefulness still available. 

Determining Value of Second-hand Implements and Machinery. — 
For instance, if new equipment of plows, harrows, and similar implements, 
costing $400, will last 10 years, and an outfit cost $400, the annual charge 
will be $52, being interest at 6 per cent on the material average valuation 
and depreciation at 10 per cent. If a second-hand outfit suitable for the 
same purpose is offered for $200 and has but 4 years of life, the charge 
will amount to $56 per year for its use; if it will last but 2 years the cost 
will be $106. At the same time an estimate must be made to cover breaks 
and repairs which increase with age and amount to a greater figure for 
the second-hand stuff than for new equipment. On the other hand, if 
the material average valuation could be obtained for $150 and half their 
usefulness still remains, a saving can be effected of about $20 a year over 
the cost of the new things. 

Determining Value of Work Animals. — The same thing holds with 
work animals, although not to so marked an extent. Ten years is con- 
sidered the average working life of a horse, or to 13 years of age, yet 
if one finds a fairly sound, well preserved animal of 10, he will probably 
be good for 5 or 6 years more and one can afford to pay more for him in 
proportion to his years than for a young animal. 

If work animals at 4 years of age are worth $200, figured on 10 years 
of service, $20 must be charged off each year. At this rate a 10-year old 
animal will have worked 7 years and accordingly under this arrangement 
is worth but $60. But, if $20 is the average yearly value of a good work 
animal, a 10-year-old with 5 or 6 years good work still remaining is worth 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 207 

from $100 to $120, On the other hand a 6-year-old horse abused for 
2 years may have but 2 or 3 years left to him and in consequence will not 
be worth over $40 to $60. 

Determining Value of Dairy Cows. — Dairy cows offer a somewhat 
more complicated problem since they have beef values as well as milking 
values. A dairy cow's usefulness is figured as covering 10 years; or, she 
will be ready to beef at 12 years of age. At 2 years old a good heifer, 
let us say, is worth $40 to $50; at 3 perhaps $10 more, and at 4 from $60 
to $70. As beef, these cows are worth about 50 per cent of good beef 
cattle: under prices of 7^ for beef they are worth $35 to $40 for the 
block. On this basis a cow appreciates from two to four years of age. 
Beginning at 4 years, however, they lose about $30 in the 6 remain- 
ing years, although in actual practice the loss usually occurs only during 
the last couple of years. A cow therefore is worth practically full price 
from 4 to 8 years old, then drops about $10 a year in value thereafter. 

Depreciation Mounts with Age. — From these few pointers one gathers 
tnat the older stock or implements are, the less one can afford to pay for 
them. Moreover, unless the price is low enough they may prove more 
costly in the long run than young stock or new implements. 

When Second-hand Equipment Is Especially Worth While. — There is 
one other way to look at this matter, however. Sometimes a man with 
limited capital, anxious to make it go as far as possible when starting in 
to farm, had better buy second-hand things to begin with. While he 
will pay higher premiums for the use of such stock and implements he 
will not infrequently at the same time be able to make his ready money 
go farther and in the long run get sufficiently greater returns, through the 
release of capital, to warrant the higher cost exacted by second-hand 
purchases. 

Costs of Equipment 

The costs of equipment in the following examples are figured by 
carefully determining the list of necessary items and their costs at the 
farm. As examples, the costs of the 320-acre grain farm and the 20-cow 
dairy referred to under lists of equipment (page 201) were found for the 
conditions and priced where these farms were located (California), to 
be: 

Cost of Equipping a 20-cow Dairy 

Buildings — (Material only) 

Dwelling $800. 00 

Windmill, well, tank and tank house 250 . 00 

Hay (100 tons) and horse barn and corrals 400,00 

Cow barn (28 by 40 ft.) with cement floor and corrals 345.00 

Wood silo (14 by 20 ft.) 250 . 00 

Blacksmith shop and implement shed 150 . 00 

Milk room 50.00 2,245.00 



208 ' FARM MANAGEMENT 

Fences 

Around farm — 3 strands barbed wire, posts 1 3^^ rods apart . 65 . 25 

Implements and Machinery 

12-in. walking plow 21 . 50 

9-ft. spike tooth harrow 18. 70 

Fresno scraper 21 . 00 

5-ft. mower 72 . 00 

10-ft. rake 40 . 00 

l)^-ton wagon 85 . 00 

Hay rack 25 . 00 

2 shovels 1 . 50 

3 pitchforks 3 . 00 

Double and single trees, halters, ropes, etc 15.00 

Spring wagon and single harness 100. 00 402 . 70 

Work Stock and Harness 

2 work horses and harness 342 . 00 

Driving or riding horse and harness 125 . 00 467 . 00 

Live Stock Other than Work Animals 

20 cows at $90.00 each 1,800.00 

1 bull 150.00 1,950.00 

Special Equipment 

Piping to buildings 20 . 00 

Cesspool and sewer 50 . 00 

2 drinking troughs 50 . 00 

Wheelbarrow 5 . 00 

16-bu. feeding truck 28. 40 

40 ft. hose ■ 20.00 

2 barn shovels 3 . 00 

2 brooms 3 . 00 

2 hoes 1 . 20 

2 stable forks 2 . 00 

Jackson hay fork 10. 00 

2 milk stools 2 . 50 

2 20-qt. pails 7 . 00 

2-compartment wash sink 27 . 00 

2-hp. boiler 101 . 00 

20-ft. 8-in. stack; roof plates; spark arrester and damper. . . 16.00 

Separator 90. 00 

1 dozen brushes 4 . 00 

Keg washing powder 4 . 40 

Ideal sanitary cream cooler 12 . 00 

Babcock tester 12 . 00 

Scales 2.50 497.50 

Small Tools and Shop Material 

Material, as nails, nuts bolts, scrap iron, lumber, etc 20.00 

Small tools and blacksmith outfit 50.00 70.00 



Total $5,697.45 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 209 
Cost of Equipping a 320 -acre Grain Ranch 

Buildings — Material only 

Dwelling S800 . 00 

Hay and horse barn 600 . 00 

Windmill, well, tank and tank house 250. 00 

Implement shed and blacksmith shop 200 . 00 . 11 , 850. 00 

Fences 

For entire farm (three strands barbed wire, posts IJ^ rods 

apart) 783.00 

Implements and Machinery 

2 Stockton gang plows 130 . 00 

1 spike tooth harrow, 4-section. 40 . 00 

1 grain drill 115 . 00 

1 grain binder 175 . 00 

1 mower, 5-ft 72 . 00 

1 hay rake, 10-ft 40 . 00 

1 Jackson fork 15 . 00 

2 hauling wagons 120 . 00 

1 cart 65 . 00 

2 hay racks 50 . 00 

6 pitchforks 6 . 00 

1 post hole auger 2 . 50 

1 wire stretcher 2 . 50 

1 shovel 1 . 80 

1 Fresno scraper 21 . 00 

Lead bars 15.00 870.80 

Work Stock and Harness 

12 work horses, collars and harness 2 , 004 . 00 

1 driving horse and harness 150.00 2, 154.00 

Live Stock Other than Work Stock 

Poultry and cow 100. 00 

Special Eqtdpment 

2 manure forks 2 . 00 

1 broom 1 . 50 

1 wheelbarrow 5 . 00 

1 drinking trough 13 . 00 

Piping to buildings 20 . 00 

Incidentals as rope, halters, buckets, etc 25 . 00 66 . 50 

Small Tools and Shop Material 

Blacksmith outfit and small tools 50 . 00 

Shop material — nails, bolts, iron, lumber, etc 50.00 100.00 

Total $5,924.30 

Cost of Equipping 60-acre Diversified Farm. — Costs of equipping the diversified 
farm for which equipment was selected (see page 202) result in cost summaries, 
based on pre-war (1915) and post-war (1919) conditions, as follows: 

Pre-war Post-war 

Trees 1,140 at 25 ff $ 385.00 $ 410.00 

14 



898 


.00 


389 


.00 


267 


.00 


15 


.00 


45 


00 


70 


00 


155 


00 


15 


00 


32 


00 


375 


00 


180. 


00 


130. 


00 


65. 


00 



210 FARM MANAGEMENT 

B uildings 

House 473 . 00 

Barn 205 . 00 

Milk barn 141 . 00 

Hen house 13 . 00 

Fruit shed 28.00 

Silo (at $1.50 per ton capacity) 40 . 00 

Farrowing pens 84 . 00 

Field shelter for hogs 1 1 . 00 

Field shelter for cows 18 . 00 

Well, tank, windmill and tower (erected) 250.00 

Ditch boxes (300 b. ft. in each at $30 per M. clear lumber). 72 . 00 
Sewer and cesspool (200 ft., 6-in. sewer pipe and wooden 

lined cesspool 70 . 00 

200 ft., M-in. galvanized iron piping and fittings 36.00 

Total $1,440.00 $2,636.00 

Fences 

Fence No. 1 (hogs) 

3 barb wires, 26-in. woven wire, on 
posts 16 ft. apart with 2 pickets between 

160 rods 140.00 270.00 

Fence No. 2 (cow pasture and boundary) 

4 strands on posts 16 ft. apart 570 rods 222 . 00 387 . 00 

Fence No. 3 (corral) requires 

50 posts 8 ft. long of 4 by 4 in. 

1,200 running ft. of 2 by 6 in. 

Hardware 37.00 74.00 

Fence No. 4 (chicken yard) requires 

22 posts 2 by 4 in. 

1,400 sq. ft. wire netting 

1 by 6-in. baseboard, 2,300 running feet 

Staples, hinges and hardware 14 . 00 27 . 00 

Fence No. 5 (farmstead fence) requires 

7-ft. posts 

4,600 running feet of 1 by 6 in. 

Nails, and braces and gate material 81 . 00 151 . 00 



Total $466 . 00 $909 . 00 

Work Animals $600.00 $600.00 



Live stock — fowls, cows, sows, boar, bull 1 , 205 .00 2 , 145 . 00 



Implements and Machinery 

14-in. walking plow 20.00 38.00 

10-in. walking plow 15.00 34.00 

8-ft. spring harrow 8 . 00 16 . 00 

4-ft. disc harrow 22.00 34.00 

1 four-section spike harrow 32 . 00 64 . 00 

Plank drag (home made) 3 . 00 10 . 00 

Buggy 96.00 110.00 

Orchard wagon 90.00 98.00 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 211 

l>^-ton wagon with hay and flat racks" 110 . 00 213 . GO 

Light spring wagon 100 . 00 130 . 00 

Hand spraying machine 26 . 00 30 . 00 

Land cultivator 60 . 00 106 . 00 

■i-horse land scraper 21 . 00 36 . 00 

5-ft. mower 72.00 98.00 

10-ft. rake 35 . 00 63 . 00 

Corn planter, hand 3 . 00 5 . 00 

Jackson fork and derrick 90 . 00 128 . 00 

Total $803.00 $1,213.00 

Miscellaneous Equipment 

2 shovels 2 . 00 3 . 00 

3 pitchforks 3 . 00 3 . 75 

Double and single trees, lead bars, and eveners 15 . 00 18 . 00 

Post hole auger 2 . 50 4 . 00 

Wire stretchers 2 . 50 5 . 00 

4 halters 5.00 10.00 

251b. rope 4.50 6.00 

Rake 1.25 2.00 

Wagon jack 1 . 00 1 . 50 

Curry comb and brush 1 . 00 1 . 50 

2 corn knives 1 . 00 2 . 00 

4 10-gal. milk cans 1 1 . 20 18 . 00 

2 20-qt. milk pails 5 . 00 5 . 00 

Dipping vat for hogs (material) 12 . 00 24 . 00 

Spade 1.50 2.50 

Material for troughs and feed racks 8 . 00 16 . 00 

Wheelbarrow 4 . 50 7 . 00 

16-bu. feeding truck 28 . 40 35 . 00 

40 ft. hose 6 . 40 10 . 00 

Broom 0.50 0.75 

2 hoes 1.30 2.00 

Pick 1.00 1.50 

Stable fork 1 . 00 1 . 50 

Can brush 1 . 00 1 . 25 

Washing powder 4 . 50 6 . 00 

Babcock tester and bottles 12.00 15.00 

Scales 2 . 50 3 . 50 

2 sets chain harness 70 . 00 108 . 00 

1 set light harness 35 . 00 60 . 00 

1 single harness 20 . 00 30 . 00 

Canvas for almond harvest 12 . 00 26 . 00 

Knocking poles (4) 2 . 00 4 . 00 

Pruning saw ■ . 50 . 70 

30-in. pruning shears 3 . 00 3 . 00 

Ladders 7.20 14.40 

400 lug boxes (,50 lb.) 60.00 96.00 

600 drying trays 210 . 00 360 . 00 

Prune dip 162 . 00 225 . 00 

Total $720.75 $1232.65 



212 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Carpenter outfit 

Blacksmith outfit 

Other tools 

Personal effects. 

Ornamentals (20) 

Total Cost of Equipping 

Buildings and structures (other than fences). 

Fences 

Trees 

Work stock 

Live stock 

Implements and machinery 

Miscellaneous equipment 

Small tools 

Personal effects 

Ornaments 



31.00 


48.00 


47.00 


75.00 


29.00 


46.00 



10.00 



15.00 



GRAND TOTAL (not including value of personal 
effects) 



1,440.00 


2,636.00 


466.00 


909.00 


385.00 


410.00 


600.00 


600.00 


1,205.00 


2,145.00 


803 . 00 


1,213.00 


720.75 


1232 . 65 


107.00 


169.00 


10.00 


15.00 



.329.65 



$5 , 736 . 75 

For the sake of brevity summaries only of costs for the other indus- 
tries for which lists of equipment are given (pages 200 to 206) are inserted 
for comparison. These were found to be: 



Industry 


Total 
equip- 
ment 
costs 


Build- 
ings 


Fences 


Imple- 
ments 

and 
mach- 
inery 


Work 

stock 

and 

harness 


Live 
stock 


Special 
equip- 
ment 


Small 
tools 
and 
shop 
material 


20-acre fruit orchard. . . 
2,500-acre poultry farm 


$3 . 260 
4,809 


$1,300 
1,925 


$ 65 
950 


$1,438 

84 


$342 
125 


$ 2.5 
1,056 


$ 20 
639 


$70 
30 



When figures are based on pre-war prices, it is in the belief that a return 
to the pre-war basis is likely. The costs of the same equipment, if figured 
under war conditions (1919), should be increased 82.6 per cent for 
building materials 51.1 per cent for implements, wagons, and farm 
machinery; 48.4 per cent for miscellaneous minor equipment and sup- 
plies; 100 per cent for labor; little or none for work animals; 90 per 
cent for other live stock. 

State Findings Concerning Costs of Equipping Farms 
Michigan'^* Costs of Equipping Dairy Farms. — Studies conducted 
during 1914-15 found a wide range in amount of investment per farm and 
per cow in dairy buildings and dairy equipment. Summarized for 29 
farms the findings were: 



Investment in 


Range 


Average 




Per farm 


Per cow 


per cow 


Dairy buildings 


$632.00 to $4,500.00 
8.24 to 170.56 


$41.45 to $240.92 
0.64 to 6.54 


$95 . 26 


Dairy equipment 


1.97 







FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 213 

The investment in pails, cans, strainers, coolers, etc., averaged less 
than $2.00 per cow. 

If one expresses these three classes of investment in percentage 
terms they will be approximately as follows: 

Per cent 

Investment in cattle 45 

Investment in buildings 54 

Investment in equipment 1 



When individual farms are studied a considerable range of investment 
per cow is noted. This is occasioned by the kind and condition of the 
cows; the number, age, and state of repair of the buildings; and the 
amount and condition of the other equipment. 

Dairy Farm Equipment Costs — Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, 
and North Carolina. — From a study of four dairy farms located in Wis- 
consin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina, ^^ the investment per 
cow in dairy buildings was found to be, respectively, $84, $50, $83 and 
$80 per cow for dairy barns. 

Relation of Dairy Equipment Investments to Returns. — Other things 
being equal, the larger the herd that can be accommodated with a given 
investment the lower the overhead per cow. 

The question of an economic investment in equipment and supplies 
is closely related to that of buildings, and the same general principles 
hold true in both cases. Expensive milk coolers and ice supplies, which 
may be absolutely necessary in the production of high-grade milk for a 
special market, might be both unnecessary and extravagant in the pro- 
duction of cream to be sold on the butter-fat basis. In other words, 
expenses for buildings, equipment, and supplies should never be so high 
as to make it difficult or impossible to realize a reasonable dividend on 
the capital invested in the herd. 

Building Equipment Costs — Ohio. — From a study of 21 Ohio^^ farms 
costs were found to range about as follows: 

Table 59. — ^Building Equipment Costs — Ohio 



Building 



Type 



Size, ft. 



Cost 



Stock barn. . . . 

Hay 

Crib 

Workshop 

Hog house. . . . 
Poultry house. 



Basement or "bank". 



Double driveway between 



4 pens &Hhy Sit 

Allowing 4 sq. ft. per fowl 



36 by 60 
16 by 32 
20 by 28 by 10 
22 by 30 by 12 
12 by 27 
12 by 20 



$1,800 
150 

200-250 

250-300 

60-100 

50-75 



214 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Total Farm Equipment Costs — Ohio. — The cost of equipping a farm, 
based on the average of 21 farms,^^ was found to be: 

Farm buildings $ 2,700.00 

Household buildings 2,500 . 00 

Fences 763. 74 

Drainage 366 . 43 

Water supply 225. 00 

Work animals 640 . 71 

Colts and driving horses 250. 95 

Cattle 582. 26 

Sheep 201 . 05 

Swine 158. 34 

Poultry 52. 60 

Bees 3 . 23 

Harness 131 . 05 

Machinery , 1,125 . 48 

Minor articles 200 . 00 

Produce, supplies, etc 631 . 19 

Total $10,532.77 

In actual practice innumerable factors enter in to reduce the cost 
of equipping farms. Few farms in the older sections of the United States 
like Ohio are equipped outright with new buildings, fences, and machinery, 
and the summary just given would, of course, apply to only a few cases. 
It is interesting, however, in showing the amount of money which can be 
spent over a course of years in bringing the equipment up to a profitable 
working basis. 

Costs of Equipping Apple Orchards. Western Colorado. — For apple- 
bearing orchards in western Colorado the cost of equipment was found to 
be $650 for orchards averaging 38 acres in size of which 10.8 acres were 
in bearing orchard and 4.2 acres in young orchard. ^^ 

Oregon. — An average 40-acre Hood River Valley farm of Oregon 
having 46 per cent in bearing apple orchard represented an outlay of 
$491 for equipment and $333 for work stock. ^'' 

Washington. — Study of 120 representative bearing orchards in Yakima 
Valley, Wash., averaging 15.82 acres in size and 6.39 acres of bearing trees, 
in 1915 had an average investment in equipment of $405.48 for each ranch 
or $30.88 for every acre of bearing orchard. ^^ 

Idaho. — In the Payette Valley, Idaho, a study of 38 representative 
bearing apple orchards,^^ made in 1915, averaging 53.39 acres with an 
average of 11.33 acres of orchard, indicated a ranch investment in equip- 
ment of $542,63 or a per acreage rate prorated over bearing orchard of 
$20.50. 

Equipment Costs as Shown by Farm Management Surveys. — Equip- 
ment costs resulting from farm management survey inquiries are given 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 215 

in the chapter on capital. The summaries show totals of equipment 
costs on the many different types of farms in various localities. The 
student is referred to pages 240 to 246 for these data. 

Costs of Farm Equipment Vary. — Fluctuations from time to time in 
the costs of various items of farm equipment are extensive. It is there- 
fore necessary for farm management students to collect accurate data 
based on local conditions and prevailing prices. Costs of various items 
vary within wide extremes in different parts of the country. For instance, 
barns built in timber region where farmers are skilled as carpenters will 
cost much less than in a treeless country where lumber must be shipped 
in from long distances and where union carpenters must be employed. 
Concrete costs are materially reduced when the farm possesses a good 
gravel bed. Distance of shipment, amount of competition, and the credit 
rating of a community, are factors affecting cost of implements and 
machinery. 

Example of Costs, and Variation in Costs, of Farm Equipment. — 
Some idea of the costs of implements and supplies is furnished in the 
following table showing the costs of selected farm equipment, collected 
for western farming conditions. The prices indicate the influence of 
war conditions. They are for the years 1915 and 1919, the former repre- 
senting pre-war, the latter war conditions. 

Table 60. — Costs, and Variation in Costs, of Farm Equipment 



Farm implements, wagons, and machinery 

Cleaner, for grain 

Cultivators 

Crop, 1-horse 

Crop, 2-horse 

Land 

Derricks, hay, 14-ft. mast 

Diggers, potato, elevator type 

Harrows 

Disc, 8-ft., 16-18-in. discs 

Spike, 4-8-ft. sections 

Spring tooth, 9-ft 

' 15-ft 

Harvesters, grain binder, 6-ft 

Corn binder, 6-ft 

Grain, headers, 10-ft 

Mower, 5-ft 

Planters, corn, 2-row 2-horse 

Bean, 2-row 2-horse 

Potato, 2-row 2-horse 

Beet, 4-row 2-horse 



Costs 


AS OF 


1915 


1919 


(Pre-war) 


(War) 


5 45.00 


$ 65.00 


8.00 


10.00 


50.00 


87.00 


60.00 


106.00 


90.00 


128.00 


135.00 


224.00 


70.00 


111.00 


32.00 


64.00 


16.00 


23.00 


22.00 


34.00 


150 . 00 


227 . 00 


175.00 


207 . 00 


250.00 


361.00 


72.00 


98.00 


48.00 


78.00 


40.00 


78.00 


106 . 00 


185.00 


50.00 


96.00 



216 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Table 60. — Costs, a^v> Variation in Costs, of Farm Equipment. {Cont'd) 



Plows, breaker 

12-in. single 

14-in. single 

16-in single 

Plows, disc 

24-in. with 1 disc 

24:-in. with 2 discs 

24-in. with 3 discs 

24-in. with 4 discs 

24-in. with 5 discs 

Plows, gang 

12-in. 2-gang 

14-in. 3-gang 

12-in. 3-gang 

12-in. 4-gang 

Plows, Stockton gang 

8-in. 3-gang 

8-in. 4-gang 

10-in. 4-gang 

Plows, side-hill 

10-in. single 

12-in. single 

Plows, sulky 

14-in. single 

16-in. single 

Plows, walking 

10-in 

12-in 

14-in 

Press (18 by 22-in.) hay 

Rakes 

10-ft. 1-horse 

12-ft. 2-horse 

Buck 

Rollers, corrugated iron 

5-ft 

8-ft 

Scrapers, Fresno 

5-ft. 4-horse 

Seeders 

Broadcasters 

Drill, 16-7-in. single discs 
4-horse 

Drill, 16-7-in. double discs 
4-horse 

Drill, 10-ft., steel wheels. . . 
Spreaders, manure, 2-horse. . . . 
Stacker, hay, complete 



Costs 


AS OP 


1915 


1919 


(Pre-wak) 


(War) 


18.00 


29.00 


22.00 


32.00 


25.00 


35.00 


65.00 


100.00 


82.00 


186.00 


96.00 


213.00 


112.00 


250.00 


125.00 


280.00 


77.00 


126.00 


81.00 


132.00 


70.00 


171.00 


115.00 


206.00 




54 00 




62.00 




67 00 


14.00 


27.00 


16.00 


29.00 


58.00 


105.00 


60.00 


107.00 


15.00 


34.00 


18.00 


35.00 


20.00 


38.00 


350.00 


625.00 


35.00 


63.00 


42.00 


68.00 


40.00 


65.00 


60.00 


70,00 


85,00 


100.00 


21.00 


36.00 


25.00 


40.00 


124.00 


204.00 


130.00 


230.00 


107 . 00 


223.00 


170.00 


258.00 


70.00 


115.00 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 217 

Table 60. — Costs, and Variation in Costs, of Farm Equipment. (Cont'd) 

Costs as of 
1915 1919 

(Pre-war) (War) 

Thresher 

Grain, 26-in. cylinder, not mounted 350 . 00 650 . 00 

Grain, combine 2,500.00 4,000.00 

Grain, stationary 5,000.00 6,500.00 

Wagons, farm 

Buggy 96.00 110.00 

Single 90.00 98.00 

13^-ton 110.00 213.00 

21^-ton 145.00 243.00 

Buildifcg Materials. 

Lumber, per M. (thousand board feet) 
Pine, 

♦Common: 1 by 3, 1 by 6, 1 by 8, 1 by 10, 

6to 18ft. long 20.00 40.00 

Common: 3 by 10, 3 by 12, 4 by 4, to 

4 by 12— 12 to 20 ft 18.00 40.00 

Same : 34 to 40 ft 23.00 50.00 

Flooring, T. & G, SIS, 1 by 4, assorted lengths, 

to 8 ft 34.00 66.00 

Ceiling, T&G, SIS, ^i by 4, assorted 

lengths, 4 to 10 ft 31.00 48.00 

Lath 13^ in. by 4 ft., per thousand 5.00 7.50 

Rustic, 1 by 6, 6 to 20 ft 32.00 52.00 

Redwood, 

♦Common, 1 by 3, 1 by 4, 1 by 6, 1 by 8, 

10 to 20 ft 21.00 40.00 

1 by 12, 10 to 20 ft 24.00 46.00 

2 by 3, 2 by 4, 2 by 6, to 2 by 10—10 to 

20 ft 20.00 40.00 

4by4to4by 10, 10to20ft 21.00 42.00 

Clears, 3 and 4-in. 

Rustic, 1 by 4, 6 to 20-ft 57 . 00 

1 by 6, 6 to 20-ft 37.00 60.00 

Bevel siding, 1 by 4, 6 to 20-ft 32 . 00 

H by 4, 6 to 20-ft 44 . 00 

Ceiling, 1 by 4, V under 6-ft 20 . 00 41 . 00 

Battens ^ by 3, per lineal foot . OOH i . 01 

Shakes, sawn, 6 by 36 per 1,000 pieces 15 . 00 30 . 00 

Shingles, No. 1, per bundle 0.60 1.20 

Shingles, No. 2, per bundle 0.50 1.00 

*In estimating lumber add 10 per cent for waste, 1,000 shingles (4 bundles) 
will cover 80 sq. ft. if laid 4 in. to the weather, 90 sq. ft. at 4)^ in., and 1,000 
sq. ft. at 5 in. 1,000 shakes laid "shake fashion" (lapping 6 in. at ends and 1)^ 
in. at sides) will cover 900 sq. ft. 1,000 shakes laid "shingle fashion" (16 in. 
exposed — double layer) will cover 700 sq. ft.). 



218 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Table 60. — Costs, and Variation in Costs, of Farm Equipment. (Cont'd) 



Galvanized Iron Roofing 

No. 24, per 100 lb 

No. 26, per 100 lb 

(Comes in lengths 24 by 72 in. and weighs per 
square foot, 24, 1.156 lbs., 25, .906 lbs.) 
Miscellaneous 

Cement, per 100 lb 

Linseed oil, per gal 

Nails, 100 lb., base 

Paints, per gal 

Windmills 

8 ft. in diameter 

10 ft. in diameter 

12 ft. in diameter 

Water Tanks 

1 ,500 gal., 8-ft. diameter, 5 ft. high 

2,500 gal., 8-ft. diameter, 7 ft. high 

4,000 gal., 10-ft. diameter, 8 ft. high 

Fencing Materials 

Posts, 4 by 5, 7-ft. split 

Pickets, 3 by 3, 7-ft. splits 

Barb wire, per 100 lb. 

Heavy, four point 

Medium, four point 

(Figure 1 ,350 running feet per 100 lb. of heavy. 
Figure 1 ,600 running feet per 100 lb. of medium) 
Woven wire — hog and sheep fence 

Heavy, per rod 

26 in. per rod 

32 in. per rod 

39 in. per rod 

Medium, per rod 

26 in 

32 in 

39 in 

Poultry and Rabbit Fence 

2-iii. mesh, per square foot 

1 to 6 ft. wide 

1-in. mesh, per square feet 

1 to 6 ft. wide 

(Figure 165 running feet per roll) 
Wire Gates 

Walk gates 

Single, drive gates 

Staples 

^^ in., per pound 

1}4 in., per pound 



Costs 


AS 


OF 




1915 






1919 


(Pre-wak) 






(War) 


4.00 






9.45 


3.85 






9.55 



0.85 


0.85 


1.00 


3.00 


4.50 


6.50 


2.00 


3.60 




55.00 




80 00 




145 . 00 




40.00 




60.00 




80.00 


0.23 


0.35 


0.12 


0.21 


3.00 


6.70 


3.10 


6.80 



0.35 
0.37 
0.40 


0.71 

0.83 
0.96 

0.53 




0.63 




0.72 


O.OO^fo 
0.01^0 


O.OlHo 
O.Ol^lo 



1.50 


3.50 


3.50 


6.50 


0.04 


0.12M 


0.03 


0.10 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS A ND MA CHINER F 2 19 

Table 60. — Costs, and Variation in Costs, of Farm Equipment. (Cont'd) 

Costs as of 
1915 1919 

(Pre-war) (War) 

(Figure 480 per pound of ^i in. and 60 per pound 
of U^in.) 

Wire stretcher 4.50 6.50 

General Equipment and Supplies 

Brooms 

Coal oil, gallon 

Grindstone 

Halters 

Harness 

Single 

Work, double (leather) 

Work, double (chain) 

Horse blankets 

Horse collars 

Lanterns 

Lead bars 

Single, per dozen 

Double, per dozen 

Rope, per pound 

Saddles 

Water pipe, per foot 
Black 

H-i^ 

IM-in 

Galvanized 

M-in 

l>^-in 

Wheelbarrows 

Whips 

Tools and Hand Implements 

Axe 

Hatchet 

Hoe 

Pick 

Pitchfork 

Scythe and snath 

Shovel 

Irrigating Equipment and Materials 
Discharge pipe, per foot 
Wooden, banded 

4-in 0.31 

6-in 0.45 

8-in . 54 

10-in 0.68 

Steel 

4-in 0.49 

6-in 0.68 

8-in 0.83 

10-in 1.02 



0.50 


1.00 


0.13 


0.15 


5.00 


8.00 


1.25 


2.50 


20.00 


30.00 


45.00 


60.00 


35.00 


54.00 


3.00 


6.00 


7.00 


9.00 


1.00 


1.50 


5.00 


6.00 


10.00 


12.00 


0.18 


0.25 


40.00 


55.00 


0.05 


0.07 


0.07 


0.09 


0.10 


0.16 


0.13 


0.20 


4.50 


7.00 


0.75 


1.00 


1.25 


2.50 


0.75 


1.10 


0.65 


1.00 


1.00 


1.50 


1.00 


1.25 


1.25 


3.50 


1.00 


1.50 



220 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Table 60. — Costs, and Variation in Costs, of Farm Equipment. (Cont'd) 

Costs as cf 

1915 1919 

(Pre-war) (War) 

Drilling wells, per foot 

10 in. to first 100 ft 1.00* 2.00** 

12 in. to first 100 ft 1.25* 2.25** 

14 in. to first 100 ft 1.50* 2.50** 

Electric motors, with pulleys, bases, and starters, 

5hp : 115.00 

10 hp 240.00 

20 hp ■. 315.00 

40 hp 555 . 00 

Fuel, per gal., in quantity 

Distillate 0.08 0.15 

Gasoline 0.12 0.22 

Gasoline engines, each 

5hp 220.00 

10 hp 388.00 

20 hp 1,345.00 

40 hp '. 3,660.00 

Irrigating pipe 

Galvanized, per foot 
10-ft. lengths 

8-ft. 22-gauge 0.45 

10-ft., 20-gauge . 73 

Pumps, centrifugal each 

2-in 75.00 

23^-in 85.00 

3-in 110.00 

4-in 140.00 

6-in 235 . 00 

Well Casing, Hard Steel, per foot. 
Double, 12-gauge 

8-in 2.49 

10-in 3.12 

12-in '3.63 

Double, 14-gavige 

8-in 1.85 

10-in 2.20 

12-in 2 . 57 

Single, with collar, 12 gauge 

8-in .... 3.38 . 

10-in 1.12 4.12 

12-in 1.51 4.83 

Single, with collar, 14 gauge 

8-in 1.00 2.50 

10-in 1.12 3.00 

r2-in 1.24 3.48 

* 25 jf raise per foot for every 50 ft. additional increase in depth. 
** 50)!f raise per foot for every 60 ft. additional increase in depth. 



FENCING, WORK STOCK, IMPLEMENTS AND MACHINERY 221 





Costs 


AS 


OP 




1915 




1919 


(Pl 


re-war) 




(War) 



12.50 



15.00 



Table 60. — Costs, and Variation in Costs, of Farm Equipment. (Cont'd) 



Dairy Equipment 

Babcock tester .• 

Boiler, 1^ hp. with 20-ft. 8-in. stack, roof plates, 

spark arrester and damper 

Bottle brushes, per dozen 

Bottle filler, 4 by 5 valves 

Bottles 

Quart size, per gross 

Pint size, per gross 

Cans, 10-gaI. size 

Cream cooler (Tube), with catch basin and 

strainer 

Feed truck, 16-bu 

Feeding buckets, for calves 

Tin, each 

Wooden, each 

Hose, per foot 

%-in. size 

1-in. size 

Pails, milking, 10-qt 

Pasteurizer, 50-gal 

Refrigerating plant, 2-ton 

Scales, hand 

Separators, cream 

135-lb. per hour size 

335-lb. per hour size 

675-lb. per hour size 

1 , 100-lb. per hour size 

Wash sink, 2-compartment 

Washer, turbine, for bottles 

Washing powder, per 100 lb 

Wooden vat, for cooling milk 

Orchard Equipment and Materials 

Bluestone, per pound 

Carbon bisulphide, per gal 

Drying trays (apricot and peach) 

Drying trays (prune and pear) 

(both 3 by 8 ft.) 

Ladders, per foot 

Lime, per barrel, 180-lb 

Lug boxes, 40-lb. size 

Lug boxes, 50-lb. size 

Picking pails. 

Potassium cyanide, per pound 

Prune dipper and grader 

Pruning shears, long 

Pruning shears, short 



117.00 


154.00 


3.50 


6.00 


110.00 


137.00 


8.75 


13.00 


5.75 


10.00 


3.00 


6.00 


40.00 


68.00 


28.00 


35.00 


0.42 


0.60 


0.40 


0.50 


0.12 


0.18 


0.15 


0.25 


2.50 


2.50 


225 . 00 


225 . 00 


700.00 


830.00 


2.50 


3.50 


40.00 


63.00 


60.00 


90.00 


85.00 


117.00 


120.00 


195 . 00 


30.00 


35.00 


18.00 


22 00 


5.00 


6 00 


12.00 


20.00 


0.0514 


0.12 


1.25 


2.00 


0.42 


0.60 


0.35 


0.50 


0.25 


0.50 


2.15 


3.00 


0.12 


0.18 


0.15 


0.24 


0.25 


0.35 


0.25 


0.32 


75.00 


125.00 


3.00 


3.00 


2.50 


2,50 



222 FARM MANAGEMENT 

T.\BLE 60. — Costs, and Variation in Costs, of Farm Equipment. (Cont'd) 



Spray outfit 

Hand 

Hand driven, unmounted 

Power, 150-gal. size 

Sulpur, per pound 

Sulpur blower 

Sulphuric acid, commercial, per pound. 

Trucks for drying house 

Poultry Equipment 

Egg cases, 36 dozen size 

Egg scales 

Feed buckets 

Feed mixer, power 

Feed troughs 

Kale cutter 

Nest eggs, per dozen 

Water troughs, with float 



Costs as of 


1915 


1919 


(Pre-war) 


(War) 


2.50 


3.50 


50.00 


65.00 


275.00 


325.00 


0.02% 


0.05 




15.00 


0.02 


0.03 


12.50 


15.00 


0.75 


1.25 


0.25 


0.50 


0.15 


0.25 


60.00 


75.00 


0.75 


1.00 


25.00 


26.00 


0.20 


0.35 


2.50 


3.50 



CHAPTER XI 
THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 

Among the vital factors of the successful outcome of one's farming 
operations, probably none outranks the factor of sufficient capital. 
It is, of course, but one element in the business of farming: with it must 
go knowledge of farming methods, crop requirements, and stock handling; 
experience in handling details; personal ability; a liking for the work. 
No one cares to dwell upon failures. But failures in farming have 
occurred, are occurring, and will occur. And so many of these failures 
trace to lack of capital that one is compelled to emphasize the quite 
obvious fact that farming as at present constituted necessitates capital. 

Recognition of Importance of Capital a Safeguard. — Success in 
farming doesn't rest wholly on capital; but just as surely it doesn't rest 
entirely on enthusiasm, no matter how ardent. Capital is ammunition 
in the farming battle. And just to recognize how essential some capital 
is as a prerequisite to embarking upon farming, is in itself a protection. 
The next step is to see clearly how much capital is required to safeguard 
the investor and how he should prorate and budget his available resources. 

The trend to be taken by a discussion of the capital needs of farming 
depends on the reader. Its greatest value is for the new-comer or the 
would-be beginner in agriculture; its least value to the man who has 
passed his probation period and has "arrived. " 

"Capital" Covers Cash and Credit. — The procuring, equipping, and 
carrying on of any farm business represent a considerable investment. 
The required funds need not, however, be all cash in hand. The term 
"capital," in its broadest sense, covers credit as well as cash. 

Capital means the financial backing necessary to project, develop, 
and carry out a desired plan. 

Thus the man who desires 40 acres of land costing $200 per acre, must have 
$8,000 capital, but if he avails himself of the common plan of paj'ing 10 per cent down 
and the balance in installments, his initial cash requirements for the land cost need 
not exceed $800 plus such advance interest payments on the balance as he may agree 
to make. Similarly, accounts established for such items as family living, feed, or 
seed, to run for a season before payment need be made, represent capital as credit 
rather than as actual cash. The tenant, crop farming on a share basis, has in cash 
but a small proportion of the actual capital necessary to the conduct of his operations. 
In the same way, to carry on a stock industry may necessitate annual purchases of 
feed to the extent of $200, yet if credit is established at the local feed store, only a 
small part of this sum need be cash in hand. 

223 



224 FARM MANAGEMENT 

The California Land Settlement Board, a State-financed enterprise to put men on 
farms, found that total average needs of $16,900 to finance a family-sized farm, could 
be handled by the settler with but $3,000 to $5,000 cash on hand. These figures 
are based on 1920 costs and receipts. Under the Board's plans the settler can pro- 
cure his land, erect buildings, obtain equipment, and live until his business is self- 
supporting because he need pay but 5 per cent of his land purchase and 40 per cent 
of his improving and equipping costs. 

Credit Expands Farming Opportunities. — If it were not for the credit 
available to those properly qualified, fewer men could enter into farming 
for themselves. Men of limited means can, however, with some cash, 
take advantage of tenanting, local and Federal bank loans, credit in pur- 
chasing supplies, and advance payments on future deliveries of crops 
and stocks. These channels provide means of financing what otherwise 
might prove to be an investment too heavy for the operator to carry. 

Wisdom of Determining Capital Needs. — In planning to take up 
farming for one's self or to introduce changes in existing plans of a going 
concern, determination of the capital needs and assurance that the neces- 
sary money will be forthcoming should be carefully worked out in advance. 
Any rural community furnishes examples of ill-advised farming operations 
which have proved disastrous because of lack of capital. Unscientific 
use of available funds exhausted in paying too high a price for land, in 
erecting unnecessarily elaborate buildings, in obtaining inadequate or 
unsuitable implements, is only too common. So are cases of taking over — 
and subsequently releasing — enterprises too large for the money available. 

Capital Needs are Variable. — A grower setting out an orchard with the 
prospect of several years before returns for the fruit will meet operating 
expenses, faces a very different situation from that of the man who is 
putting in a crop of potatoes or beans or some other crop from which 
full returns may be expected by the end of the first season; or from that 
of the man who takes over a well-established, income-producing orchard. 

To embark in the cattle business with a small herd of breeding 
stock and to wait until calves are fit to market requires different capital 
needs from those for putting in an annual field crop. A family going 
into egg production and planning to develop a 2,000-fowl plant, must 
face a quite distinctive allocation of the total capital needs. A rundown 
place requiring immediate repairs uses funds not so required on a well- 
preserved place. 

Factors Affecting Capital Requirements of Farming. — Capital 
requirements are materially affected by such initial costs as price of land; 
by the number, kind, size, and variety of equipment — buildings, fencing, 
motive power, live stock, implements, and machinery, as determined by 
the kind of business, soil types, and climatic conditions; by costs of 
clearing, preparing for irrigating or draining; by personal considerations 
such as size of family, standard of living, family living arrangements; 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 225 

by operating expenditures for seed, feed, repairs and parts, sacks, boxes, 
lumber, water, taxes, labor — the items and their amounts varying for 
different businesses. This variation is easy to see, for one who is inter- 
ested. When on some trip through a farming country observe the 
variations in size of farms; the widely divergent types of farming 
with the attendant differences in equipment and operating needs and 
in styles and costs of buildings and other structures; the nationality of the 
farmers as it bears on size of family and standard of living; the number 
of automobiles, trucks, and tractors. If one wishes a specially fascinating 
problem, he can find it in attempting to estimate the capital used by 
ten farms having outstanding differences in plan and method of oper- 
ating. When one unacquainted with farm needs assumes a moral obli- 
gation to do this, and to follow it with a similar study of 20 to 30 farms 
typical of the particular kind of farming that he wishes to follow, a better 
understanding of capital needs accrues, and to the distinct advantage of 
the investigator. " 

Individual Determinations Necessary. — To safeguard the finances 
necessary to establish and carry on a given business, each proposition 
must be worked out by itself through a careful tabulating of probable 
expenses and receipts. No general sums that would be of practical 
value can be given, since capital needs, as already stated, vary between 
wide extremes. 

Estimating and Grouping Capital Needs. — The determination of 
capital requirements is aided by some such grouping of items as is given 
below. The main precautions to observe in making a tabulation are: 
(a) to include all items of expense; (6) to cover all possible receipts; (c) 
to exercise discretion in estimating both expenses and receipts so that 
the figures will approximate actual conditions as closely as possible. Too 
much pyramiding of expenses may do the business an injustice; too 
optimistic a statement covering receipts may later work a hardship in 
making up a deficiency. Each item should be carefully scanned, and 
figured from all available data with as few off-hand estimates as possible, 
so that the final result represents a conservative, carefully worked out, 
and clearly exhibited statement of the probable financial situation to be 
met. 

The grouping as given below is not fixed, it may be varied to suit. 

(a) Purchase of Land. — The sum needed will be either for outright purchase or for 
covering the first payment. If for the latter only, it is essential to give most careful 
and practical consideration to subsequent payments of both principal and interest. 

(6) Necessary Improvements. — If upon raw land, there may be expenditures required 
for checking, making ditches, building lanes, bridging, fencing, leveling, removing 
natural vegetation, and the like. 

Water supply for domestic use or for irrigation. — This includes cost of equipment, 
such as casing for wells, drilling wells, wind-mill, motor, gasoline engine, pump tank 

15 



226 FARM MANAGEMENT 

and tower, reservoir, piping, or provision for whatever method is used in obtaining 
and conveying the water. 

Sanitary provisions for proper disposal of sewage from house and conservation of 
manure from the barns. 

(d) Equipment. — Buildings will be a substantial item. Dwelling, barn, implement 
shed, milking shed, poultry houses, hog pens, are to be considered. 

Under this item comes also the money for providing the various implements, tools, 
wagons, and machinery, for carrying on the business. As the kind and amount varies 
with the business, it is necessary to make an individual determination for every case. 

Under this heading should also be included the necessary power such as work stock, 
tractors, engines, and the like. So too the other live stock called for by the business — 
e.g., dairy cows, hogs, poultry, beef cattle, sheep. 

(d) Operating Expense. — It is especially necessary when starting a new business to 
allow a sufficient sum for carrying on the work until the plan is in full operation. This 
sum must cover all possible expenditures for such things as labor, horse feed, irrigation 
water, blacksmith and harness bills, seed, fertilizer, orchard trees, axle grease, oil, 
gasoline, cotton waste, taxes, insurance and the many other items incident to a farm 
business. 

(e) Personal Expense. — This is of necessity an individual item. It covers grocery 
and butcher bills, clothing, books, entertainment, travel, medical attendance, and the 
various family demands upon the finances. 

Estimating Possible Returns. — Against the capital needs are to be put 
the possible sources of income, from: 

(a) The different farm activities. Pessimism rather than optimism 
should prevail in determining possible sources of income from the pro- 
posed business. 

(6) Labor done outside, such as country road work, caring for property 
of non-residents, hauling, or (if the owner has a trade which can be fol- 
lowed in odd times) such work as plumbing, keeping books, acting as 
secretary, etc. 

Variation in Possible Returns. — The sources of immediate income are 
of considerable variety, as for example intercrops between growing fruit 
trees; temporary growing of small lots of truck, seed, or cannery stufif, or 
field crops of relatively high acreage value; growing berries; making 
jellies, canning fruit for sale; temporary keeping of a few dairy cows, a 
flock of hens, or some brood sows for quick returns; making of maple 
syrup; cutting of firewood; outside labor of self or horses; letting out of 
hired men and equipment. 

Conservatism Should Rule in Estimating Possible Returns. — One 
should recognize, however, that the amount of filling in that one can do is 
usually limited in most neighborhoods. A careful investigation should 
be made in the community where one expects to settle, and care exercised 
in estimating the possible income from this source. This is specially 
true of farm work which must be done within limited periods of time, 
since, when the pressure on the home place is over, outside places simi- 
larly situated will no longer be demanding labor. The same thing holds 
of ordinary non-agricultural work. There is usually a generous supply of 
this at the time when one can afford to be away from his own place. 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 227 

In estimating possible returns from sale of such occasional stuff as 
pasturage, railroad ties, Christmas trees, gravel, etc., care must be con- 
stantly exercised to use dependable data. Indeed, returns from small 
family orchards, from woodlots, from maple sugar, from berry patches, 
from the vegetable garden, from bees, from hiring out tractor, team, 
or machinery, from chances to do outside work, from hand labor, from 
sale of extra cream, milk, or eggs, or from other minor interests, must be 
computed only after marketing conditions are investigated and costs of 
putting into marketable shape are taken into account. Sources of in- 
come roughly estimated in an offhand way, frequently do not prove out in 
actual practice, so that later the calculated income is seriously curtailed. 
Such a condition might have been foretold if sufficient study had been 
given to the marketing end and to the cost of production and shipping 
as well as merely to yields. 

Care in Estimating Items of Family Expense. — The same care should 
govern in determining the items of family living. Following a compila- 
tion of total annual needs for the operator and his dependents — shelter, 
food, clothing, entertainment, medical service, charity, schooling, etc. — 
a careful estimate is made of what the farm can supply in the way of 
house rent, fuel, ice, eggs, poultry, pork, fruit, milk, vegetables, butter, 
maple sugar, etc. The difference between what is needed and what the 
farm can supply indicates the amount of cash to be obtained for family 
use. 

In a subsequent chapter — on farm profits — rather full consideration 
is given to the part that farm products play in meeting living expenses, 
and the reader is referred thereto for data amplifying this subject. 

Tabulating Capital Requirements. — For greater ease in presenting and 
reviewing figures showing the capital requirements of a given business, a 
table can be made up exhibiting totals, segregated into investment items 
and operating items. The period over which the study is to extend should 
then be divided into convenient units. The unit for a going concern 
may well be a year. For a development proposition the first six or eight 
months may be placed in one period to cover the time spent in getting 
equipment and material together, in erecting buildings, and in making 
preparation for actual farm operations; the second period may cover the 
months of breaking land, building fences, putting in irrigation or drain- 
age facilities; the third period the first year of crops; and the fourth and 
subsequent periods each equal in length to the farm year. For orchard 
plantings or similar types of farming involving relatively long lapses of 
time, the number of periods will be greater than under short term 
production. 

Method of Tabulating Capital Requirements. — The tabular method 
is convenient in that it provides a place for inserting items of capital at 
the time when they must be acquired. Cows and hogs are not purchased 



228 FARM MANAGEMENT 

until sufficient feed is assured; fruit equipment is not needed until the 
trees begin to bear; stock quarters or stock fences need not be put up until 
the business is ready for them. But the study of capital requirements 
should provide for the acquisition or control of all factors necessary to the 
conduct of the buisness. 

Possible receipts, tending to reduce capital needs, are to be determined, 
so far as may be, and deducted. If interest is to be charged upon any or 
all moneys invested, because of borrowings or a belief that investments 
should be earning returns, the proper calculations are to form a part of the 
study. 

The totals will afford an interesting opportunity to observe the time of 
greatest investment, the actual cost when the business is established, the 
influence of interest charges, and the cost versus the market value of 
farm products. This, however, is secondary. One should understand 
that the purpose of the study here outlined is simply to find out how 
much capital one must command to insure probable success of the 
enterprise. 

Precautions to be Observed in Determining Capital Requirements. — 
In working up data such as these, a few precautions should be observed. 

1. Use best available data, seeing to it that estimates of investment, 
expenses, and receipts are all founded on the same schedule of prices. 

2. Work out each detail carefully, checking and rechecking until 
satisfied that the figures represent the best available information. 

3. Be conservative in presenting data. 

4. Be careful to include all items, since needs vary with localities 
and individuals. 

5. Use data applicable to the community and suited to the require- 
ments of the operator. 

The Safety Factor in Estimating Capital Requirements. — Since there 
are likely to be contingencies that can not be specifically provided 
against, it is well to add a certain percentage to the cost of establishing, 
and to operating funds. This percentage is a variable factor and will 
fluctuate with the tone of the market. The probability of lower prices 
will increase the percentage, while the possibility of a higher market will 
reduce it. Other factors influencing the amount to add are, extent of one's 
training, knowledge, strength, and experience, the undeveloped potential 
capacities of the property, availability of necessary labor, the size of the 
business, its degree of stability, the amount of help or hindrance to be 
expected fron one's family, and similar items. 

Amount of the Safety Factor. — In studies when conditions are favorable 
at least 5 per cent should be added. This implies a frugal, resourceful 
operator who knows his business and the conditions under which he is 
to carry on and is not afraid of hard work; whose farming is of a stable 
character and whose farm is a proven producer and of sufficient size; 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 229 

whose market is reasonably sure; whose family can be counted upon to 
lend physical and moral support and to practice due economies. 

But if conditions involve a relatively high degree of ignorance of 
farming or of the community; if conditions involve doubt whether the 
business is large enough to meet expected obligations; if they involve 
questions as to the working capacity of the operator or the living require- 
ments of his family, or the producing power of the farm, or the receptivity 
of the market; in any or all of these cases as much as 20 per cent may 
have to be added to the expense estimates. 

The percentage to be allotted — the safety factor to be allowed for — 
is thus not fixed, it is a thing to be estimated as justly as may be after a 
study of the individual and his working conditions. Farming by new- 
comers or beginners — in practice or on paper — is only too liable to be 
seen in an over-rosy light. Dry farming under semi-arid conditions is 
more hazardous than where rainfall is frequent and ample. To plant an 
orchard, and then wait until crops are ready for marketing, is more 
speculative than to produce annual field crops. Crop farming as a 
general rule calls for more detailed knowledge and closer attention than 
does stock farming. The small-sized business is a greater risk than the 
more extensive plant. A favorable attitude toward the country of city 
raised families, is liable to be fraught with more uncertainty than the 
change of residence of farm reared folk ,from one country community to 
another. 

Moreover, safety in calculating justifies the addition of some figure 
to cover the unexpected. If the unexpected results in greater profit, the 
result does not carry the dire possibilities that may be attached to an 
underestimate of farm needs or of income producing possibilities. 

Example of Table Showing Method of Making Determinations of Capital Re- 
quirements. — This problem covers the purchase of 40 acres of good alfalfa land which 
has been in grain and is to be fitted for irrigating. The total acreage is to be planted 
to alfalfa with the exception of 2 acres reserved for farmstead and 1 acre for a family 
orchard. When the alfalfa is established 10 dairy cows and a bull and 10 brood sows 
and a boar are to be purchased. Four head of workstock will furnish the motive 
power, and a full set of equipment is to be provided. The land costs $250 per acre, and 
is obtainable under terms of 25 per cent down, the balance payable in 10 equal install- 
ments with interest on deferred payments at 6 per cent. Control is to be taken over 
August 1. 

Although an example based on alfalfa planted for dairying and hay production 
may have rather Umited application, it will nevertheless show how to make up a table 
of capital requirements, with its segregation of details under proper headings and 
according to years of expenditure. The fewer enterprises represented in the farm 
business, and the more information available as to yields and prices, the easier is the 
working out of the capital needs. 

The data for this particular example follows: 



230 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Table 61. — Method of Determining Capital Requirements for a Given 

Business 



Periods 



Aug. 1, 

year of 

purchase 

to Nov. 1 

of 
succeed- 
ing year. 



Second 
year 



Third 
year 



Fourth 
year 



Fifth 
year 



Investment Items 

Land 

Buildings: 

Dwelling (materials and labor) 

Horse barn and implement shed (materials 
and labor) 

Milkbarn (materials and labor) 

Milkhouse (materials only) 

Tankhouse (materials, piping, and labor) 

Poultry house (materials only) 

Farrowing pens (materials only) 

Fencing 

Work stock (4 head) 

Live stock other than work stock: 

Cows (10) 

Bull (I) 

Sows (10) 

Boar (1) 

Poultry (200) 

Implements and machinery (can be itemized to 

advantage in individual problems) 

Special equipment: 

Orchard: 

Trees 

Equipment 

Dairy 

Hogs 

Shops 

Ornamentals 

OfBce equipment 



Total capital for investment items 

Operating Items 
Labor 

Surveying 

Man and team to assist in preparing land 

Putting up hay 

Putting up hay and assisting with stock 

Feed: 

Horses 

Dairy 

Swine 

Poultry 

Taxes and insurance 

Seed: 

Alfalfa 

Vegetables 

Irrigation water 

Repairs, parts, and shop materials 

Hog serum, stock medicine, stock salt, veterinary 

services, and similar incidentals . 

Contracts: 

Baling hay 

Office 



Total capital for operating expenses. 
Personal Items 

Household furnishings 

Living and personal expenses 



Total capital for personal items. 



2,500 

3,000 

650 



250 
100 



200 
600 



200 

754 



25 
10 



75 
20 
30 



15 

885 
20 



150 



50 
100 

242 

5 

80 

100 



576 
50 



$ 1,273 



400 
1,200' 



$ 1,600 



$ 750 



$ 7.50 



500 

75 



S 750 



$ 750 



400 
250 



1,000 
150 
500 
100 



142 
240 



» 750 



100 
50 



300 
165 



800 
25 



$ 4,107 



650 

50 

50 

800 

300 

165 



450 
35 



$ 755 



650 

50 

50 

1,600 

300 

230 



5 
80 
75 

80 

450 
35 



650 

50 

50 

1,600 

300 

230 



5 
80 
75 



4.50 
35 



$1,575 



1,000 



$ 2,710 



1,200 



$ 3,605 



3,605 



$ 1,000 



$ 1,200 



$ 1,200 



1,200 



• Fifteen months. 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 231 



Table 61.- 



-Method of Determining Capital Requirements for a Given 
Business (Cont'd) 

Periods 



Aug. 1, 

year of 

purchase 

to Nov. 1 

of 
succeed- 
ing year 



Second 
year 



Third 
year 



Fourth 
year 



Fifth 
year 



Overhead Items 
Replacement: 

Orchard 

Horses * * 

Cattle** 

Swine * * 

Poultry** 

Buildings * * 

Implements and machinery** 

Special equipment** 

Interest on money borrowed for operating expenses 
Interest on deferred land payments 



Total capital for overhead items. 
Total capital needs for all items. 
Probable sales: 

Poultry 

Dairy 

Hogs 

Alfalfa 

Outside work 



(to be 



replaced 



(Non 
405 



$ 450 
11,737 



$ 485 
3,810 



1,440 



3,600 



Total receipts 

Reca pit ulation 

Total gross capital needs 

Reduced by receipts 



$ 1,856 



11,737 
1,856 



$4 , 482 



3,810 
4,482 



Necessary resources outside of business 

Add for safety factor 5 per cent of total gross needs 



Total needs by years 

Cumulative needs for all years. 
Maximum need 



$ 9,881 
585 



$ 672" 
190 



$10,466 



gain of 

$ 482 



$10,466 



$9 , 984 



by horn 



50 

25 

e in this 

360 



75 

100 

50 

e grown 

25 

50 

25 

case) 

315 



75 
100 
50 
fowl^) 

25 
50 
25 

270 



$ 510 
8,527 

882 

700 

900 

2,016 



640 
6,200 

882 
1,570 
3,870 
2,016 



595 
6,150 

882 
1,570 
3,870 
2,016 



$ 4,498 



8,527 
4,498 



$ 8,338 



6,200 
8,338 



$ 8,338 



6,150 
8,338 



$ 4,029 
425 



2,138" 
310 



$ 2,188' 
310 



$ 4,454 



gain of 
$ 1,828 



gain of 
$ 1,878 



$14,438 



$12,610 



$10,732 



$14,428 



** Prorated over entire period. 



Capital Requirements Vary with the Business. — The influence of type 
and extent of business, of the individual, of the locahty, can be seen in 
the two following examples. The first is a summary of capital require- 
ments resulting from a study covering a proposed purchase of 60 acres 
at $100, under terms of one-fifth down and the balance in 5 years with 
interest at 6 per cent, land to be ditched, checked, and irrigated un.der 
gravity system — a purchase in one of the federal reclamation projects. 
The purchaser was a man who had 35 years' farming experience under 
similar conditions to those surrounding the purchase and who of late years 
had been superintendent of large holdings. He proposed to put 30 acres 
in almonds, 20 acres in alfalfa, 10 acres in tomatoes, beans to be inter- 
cropped in the orchard, and his assets consisted of $2,500 cash and ability 
to raise $800 more at the end of the year. The man himself was a 
bachelor, somewhat failing in health, so the physical factor was in doubt. 



232 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Tabulation of various details indicated that total capital requirements 
amounted to $4,353 for the first two years, with total assets of $3,300. 
It is obvious that the undertaking, as conceived, was not to be considered 
with the present available needs. The summary showed: 



First year 



Second year 



Third year 



Fourth year 



Capital needs 

Possible receipts 

Net needs 

Add 20 per cent for emergencies 

Actual needs 

Accumulative needs by years. . 



$5,285 
2,700 
2,585 
500 
3,083 
3,083 



$4,108 
3,040 
1,068 
200 
1,268 
4,351 



$3,050 

3,540 

gain of 490 

125 
gain of 365 
3,986 



$2,918 

3,350 

gain of 432 

100 
gain of 332 
3,654 



The second, and a more elaborate, example is represented in the totals 
showing the financial requirements by years for a period of 10 years 
covering a 108 acre business to be purchased for purposes of raising alfalfa 
hay on 40 acres, running 20 brood sows, handling 20 acres in fruit (one- 
half prunes and one-half pears), 10 acres in sugar beets, 10 acres in non- 
saccharine sorghums or Indian corn to be grown for grain. In this case 
use of all moneys required for the business was borrowed with interest 
at 6 per cent, the land itself cost $250 per acre of which 10 per cent had 
to be paid down at time of purchase and the balance met in nine equal 
installments — interest being covered in the total interest charge. In- 
crease in investment by years after proper allowance is made for receipts, 
amounted to: 

Net Capital Needs 
Including Interest 
End Op On investment 

First year $24,970 

Second year 32 ,068 

Third year 39 , 547 

Fourth year 47,281 

Fifth year 55 , 307 

Sixth year 61 ,019 

Seventh year 65 , 994 

Eighth year 69 , 158 

Ninth year 70 , 500 

Tenth year 71 , 750 



Amount and Division of Farm Expenses as Indicating Capital 

Requirements 

Analysis of expenses indicates in a general way something of the 
operating needs in farming and how these expenses are prorated. 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 



233 



Amount and Distribution of Farm Expenses, Pennsylvania. — A 

study made in Pennsylvania summarized thus:^ 



Table 62. — Amount and Division of Farm Expenses — Pennsylvania (Selected 

Groups) 



Number of farms 



Acres 



40 
and 

less 



54 



61 
to 
80 



60 



101 
to 
120 



52 



over 
160 



22 



Total, 
owner, 
farms 



378 



Total 

for 
tenant 
farms 



124 



Paid labor 

Board, paid labor. . . . 

Family labor 

Machinery repairs. . . 

Building repairs 

Fence repairs 

Drain repairs 

Feed, silage, etc 

Feed, grain, etc 

Feed grinding 

Ice and milk haul. . . 

Horseshoeing 

Breeding fees, vet. . . 
Seeds, plants, etc. . . . 

Fertilizer 

Spray material 

Twine 

Threshing 

Pressing 

Machine hire 

Fuel, oil, barrels, etc. 

Insurance 

Taxes 

Miscellaneous 



Per cent 


Per cent 


Per cent 


13.0 


24.4 


24.6 


4.2 


6.1 


5.8 


16.4 


10.1 


12.9 


1.5 


1.4 


2.0 


2.7 


1.2 


1.2 


1.4 


0.9 


1.4 


1.1 


1.1 


1.1 


24.7 


18.1 


19.7 


1.6 


1.4 


1.1 




0.6 


1.0 


2.7 


2.5 


2.0 


0.9 


0.8 


0.7 


3.9 


4.3 


3.4 


11.3 


13.5 


11.4 


0.1 




0.1 


0.2 


0.4 


0.3 


1.4 


1.6 


1.2 


1.0 


2.0 


1.8 


0.5 


0.3 


0.3 


0.5 


0.6 


0.7 


2.7 


1.9 


1.6 


8.0 


6.8 


5.8 


0.2 






100.0 


100.0 


100.0 



Per cent 
36.1 
3.5 
5.0 
1.6 
0.1 
0.7 
0.2 
1.7 
21.3 
1.1 



0.3 
1.3 
2.1 



0.6 
1.9 
5.6 



Per cent 
26.8 
5.6 
9.6 
1.6 
1.8 
1.0 
0.1 
0.9 
18.7 
1.3 
0.3 
2.1 
0.8 
4.3 
12.3 

0.4 
1.4 
2.0 
0.2 
0.7 
1.9 
6.7 
0.1 



Per cent 
23.5 
5.6 
9.4 
1.6 
1.8 
1.3 

0.9 

22.0 

1.5 

. 2.4 

0.9 

3.9 

. 11.2 

0.4 
1.4 
1.6 
0.3 
0.6 
2.2 
7.3 
0.2 



(o) Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent. 



234 FARM MANAGEMENT 

The table shows in detail the nature and relative amount of expendi- 
ture for different purposes on owner and tenant farms of different sizes. 
The data for tenant farms are given in such manner as to include both 
tenants' and landlords' expenses, leaving out the rent paid by the tenant. 

Expense of Hired Labor. — On owner and tenant farms the largest 
single item of expense is for hired labor, this item being slightly greater 
on owner than on tenant farms. The owner operator, having both labor 
and capital income, can afford to hire a greater proportion of his labor, 
although, on the average, owner farms are smaller than the tenant farms 
in this region. 

Expense of Feedstuff s. — The next largest item is for concentrated feed- 
stuffs, in this case the expenditui'e being somewhat greater on tenant 
farms than on the others. Tenant farms are somewhat more heavily 
stocked with dairy cows than are owner farms. 

Expense of Fertilizers. — The third most important item is for fertil- 
izers, in this case the larger expenditure being made by owner operators. 
The slight difference in this item on the two classes of farms may be due 
in part to the fact that a larger number of cattle are kept on tenant farms, 
and farther, to the less interest by most tenants in maintenance of soil 
quality. 

Influence of Size of Farm on Costs. — The expenditure for hired labor 
increases materially with increase in size of farm. The smaller the farm, 
the larger the proportion of the work the farm family is able to do. The 
only other item of expense which shows a noticeable increase on the larger 
farms is that for baling hay and straw. This is because of the fact that 
the larger farms sell a somewhat larger proportion of their hay. On the 
other hand, many of the items are seen to decrease in relative amount as 
the size of the farm increases. It is quite natural that the item of family 
labor should thus decrease, for reasons already stated. Expenditures 
for repairs of buildings and fences, for horse shoeing, insurance, and 
taxes decrease relatively as the size of farm increases because of the rela- 
tively larger proportion of capital invested in the items concerned on the 
smaller farms. Purchased feed decreases on the larger farms because of 
their ability to produce a larger proportion of the required feedstuffs. 

Amount and Division of Farm Expenses — Utah Lake Valley. — Three 
groups of Utah farms'^" operated by owners and two groups whose owners 
rent additional land, had their expenses distributed thus : 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 235 

Table 63. — Distribution of Farm Expenses on 97 Farms, Utah Lake Valley^" 



Item of expense 



On 75 farms operated by their owners 



First group, 

26 small 

farms 



Second 

group, 29 

fruit and 

beet farms 



Third group, 

20 live-stock Average, 
farms 75 farms 



Per farm and proportion of total 



Paid labor and board. . . . 

Family labor 

Improvements and new 

equipment 

Repairs 

Feed 

Horseshoeing 

Seed and fertilizers 

Spray material 

Machine work hired 

Interest, taxes, etc 

Miscellaneous* 

Stock purchased 

Total 





Per 




Per 




cent 




cent 


1130 


20.2 


$ 244 


20.4 


61 


9.5 


192 


15.2 


143 


22.2 


283 


24.6 


23 


3.6 


51 


4.3 


74 


11.5 


79 


6.6 


10 


1.5 


14 


1.2 


14 


2.2 


19 


1.6 


14 


2.2 


25 


2.1 


20 


3.1 


30 


2.5 


70 


10. *9 


144 


12.0 


41 


6.4 


80 


6.7 


43 


6.7 


34 


2.8 


$643 


100.0 


$1,195 


100.0 



397 
218 

267 
59 

221 

19 

8 

5 

43 

175 
65 
97 



,574 



Per 
cent 
25.2 
13.9 

17.0 
3.7 

14.1 
1.2 
0.5 
0.3 
2.7 

11.1 
4.1 
6.2 



100.0 



245 
154 

231 
43 

116 
14 
15 
16 
30 

127 
60 
54 



$1,105 



Per 
cent 
22.3 
14.0 



21.0 

3.9 
10. 

1. 

1. 

1. 



100.0 



Includes decrease inventory. 



236 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Amount and Distribution of Farm Expenses — Corn Belt. — A survey 
of representative areas in Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa resulted thus in 
findings as to distribution of expenses:" 



Table 64. — Distribution of Farm Expenses (in Percentages of Total 

Expenses) on Farms Operated by Owners and Tenants in 

Indiana, Illinois and Iowa 



Item of expense 



Operated 

b}'^ owners, 

273 farms 



Operated by tenants, 
247 farms 



Farm total Tenant 



Landlord 



Labor 

Seeds 

Fertilizer 

Feed and grain 

New machinery and harness. . . 
Machinery and harness repairs 

New fences 

Fence repairs 

New buildings 

Building repairs 

Tile drains 

Twine and thrashing 

Insurance 

Taxes 

Rent 

Miscellaneous 



Per cent 

33.0 
2.1 
0.3 

18.8 
5.6 
1.3 
1.7 . 
1.3 

10.9* 
0.6 
3.8 
4.4 
1.0 

10.4 

4.8 



Per cent 

31.0 

2.5 

0.4 

10.5 

9.2 

1.6 

1.4 

1.5 

8.4 

0.8 

6.7 

6.5 

1.3 

14.4 

3.8 



Per cent 

34.6 

1.1 

9.9 

10.0 

1.8 

0.1 

0.2 

7.0 
0.7 
1.8 

28.8 
4.0 



Per cent 

0.4 

4.1 

0.9 

4.4 

0.8 

0.1 

4.0 

3.9 
22.8 

1.6 
18.4 

0.8 

2.0 
35.0 

0.8 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 237 



Amount and Distribution of Farm Expenses — Georgia. — A study 
in Sumter County, Georgia/^ gave: 

Table 65. — Distribution of Farm Expenses — Sumter County, Georgia 

(Selected Groups) 



Item of expense 



Percentage of farm expenses in each 
specified tilled acreage group 



51 to 100 

acres (41 
farms) 



151 to 250 . 

acres (31 

farms) 



Over 450 

acres (11 

farms) 



Wage hands 

Cotton picking 

labor) 

Share croppers. . 
Family labor. . . . 



and chopping (extra 



Total labor. 



Repairs 

Machinery , 

Buildings 

Fences 

Terracing 

Feed 

Hay, etc 

Grain, etc 

Horseshoeing 

Breeding fees and veterinary. 

Seeds and plants 

Fertilizer 

Croppers 

Wage hands 

Thrashing and twine 

Ginning, bags, ties, etc 

Machine hire, fuel, and oil. . . 

Insurance 

Taxes 

Interest on loan 

Miscellaneous 



8.6 

6.5 

31.8 

4.7 



51.6 



0.9 
3.6 
0.9 
0.3 

0.6 
2.1 
0.4 
0.2 
1.1 

10.3 
17.1 
0.2 
5.1 
0.1 
0.3 
3.1 
1.2 
0.9 



12.2 

5.7 

37.8 

1.9 



57.6 



1.0 
2.0 
0.6 
0.4 

0.7 
1.7 
0.2 
0.2 
1.1 

12.6 
12.4 
0.4 
4.6 
0.1 
0.5 
2.5 
1.1 
0.3 



15.4 

9.7 
30.5 



55.6 



2.7 
2.2 
(a) 
0.2 

0.2 
1.1 
0.1 
0.1 

0.8 

14.8 
14.5 
0.2 
3.9 
0.6 
1 
16 
0.6 
0.7 



(o) Less than one tenth of one per cent. 



238 FARM MANAGEMENT 

The larger the size of business, the greater becomes the expense for 
different things, even though the proportion may be constant. In this 
study the average expense for labor outside that performed by the oper- 
ator was found to be $196 per farm in the smallest-size group against an 
average of $5,412 in the largest-size group. In all the size-groups, 
except the first, the expense for labor was over 50 per cent of the total 
farm expenditures. This low labor cost, so noticeable in the smaller- 
size groups, is due to these farms being of such size that the operator did 
all or a part of the work of a laborer. After these farms become of such 
size (about 100 tilled acres) that the operator's time is mostly taken up 
in the general supervision of the business, the expense for labor is higher 
and quite imiform. The small farms furnish a greater proportion of 
family labor than the large farms, but this difference is offset by the fact 
that the larger farms hire more wage hands. 

The machinery-repair charge is considerably higher on the larger 
farms, chiefly because these farms maintain more numerous and more 
expensive implements than do the smaller farms. The building-repair 
expense runs quite uniform in all the groups, but repairs of fences are 
relatively higher upon the smaller farms. 

Capital Requirements of Farming 

Although general averages are usually of little value in their applica- 
tion to individual cases, a knowledge of what has been found necessary 
in amount of funds is of special interest to the man who is considering 
farming as a business or who wishes to compare the needs of different 
types of farming or of different farming communities. Findings from 
various sources may well be included in a discussion of capital needs. 

Capital Requirements of Farming — As Owner. — The amount of 
capital invested in farm enterprises, as determined in various sections of 
the United States, selected for study by the Survey method (for descrip- 
tion of which see page 314), varies within rather wide limits. The 
findings offer some valuable material for comparison and study. 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 239 



Table 66. — Survey Findings Concerning Capital Requirements — ^as Owners 



Key 

No.* 


Locality and year 


Type of farming 


Size of farms 


Total 
capital 








required 


1 


Southern New Hampshire, 


General, fruits, poultry 


108 acres — 31.9 under cul- 


$ 5,350. 




1909 


and dairying 


tivation 




2 


Utah Lake Valley 


Fruit and field crops 


46.6 acres — 30.9 under 
cultivation 


9,000 


3 


Selected areas of Indiana, 
Illinois and Iowa 


Corn, oats, wheat, hay 
and clover 


175 


30,606 


4 


Chester County, Penn- 
sylvania, 1916 


Hay, corn, wheat, some 
oats, and small fruits 


90 acres — 36.9 cultivated 


10,486 


6 


Cut-over lands of Michi- 
gan, Wisconsin and Min- 
nesota, 1916 


Hay, oats, corn, potatoes, 
and dairying 


108 acres — 55.2 cultivated 


6,856 


7 


Sumter County, Georgia, 
1913 










White 


Mostly cotton 


158 acres cultivated 


13,773 




Colored 


Mostly cotton 


95 acres cultivated 


5,984 


8 


Central Kentucky 


Mostly live stock and to- 
bacco 


303 acres cultivated 


37,741 


9 


Prove Area, Utah 


Fruit, truck, live stock, and 
field crops 


64 acres — 4 cultivated 


11,688 


10 


Monett, Mo. 


Grain, live stock, fruit, 
dairying 


81 acres 


9,033 


11 


Lower Rio Grande Irri- 
gated District of Texas, 


Truck gardening, stock 
and general 


73 acres — 59 cultivated 


14,000 


12 


Brooks County, Georgia, 
1918 


Cotton, hogs, corn, pea- 
nuts, oats 


331 acres — 145 cultivated 


8,992 


13 


Anderson County, South 
Carolina, 1918 


Cotton, corn, oats, and 
hay 


136 acres — 71.7 cultivated 


8,940 


14 


Irrigated valleys of South- 
ern Arizona, 1918 


Alfalfa with some small 
fruits and poultry 


95 acres 


20,706 


15 


Ellis County, Texas, 1918 


Practically confined to 
cotton 


84 acres 


16,153 


16 


Lenawee County, Michi- 
gan, 1918 


General with some dairy- 
ing 


104 acres 


11,756 


17 


Willamette Valley, Ore- 
gon, 1918 


Oat, wheat, some legu- 
minous crops and pota- 
toes 


202 acres— 141 cultivated 


22,700 


18 


Washington County, Ohio, 
1918 


Sheep and cattle with 
corn, wheat, and hay 


156 acres — 43 cultivated 


6,378 


19 


Southwestern Kentucky, 
1918 


Tobacco, wheat, general, 
live stock 


300 acres — 225 cultivated 


17,029 


20 


Northwestern P e n n s y 1 - 
vania 


Live stock and crop 


101 acres 


7,644 


21 


Central New York, 1908 


General and dairying 


103 acres — 72 cultivated 


5,576 


23 


Johnson County, Miss- 
ouri, 1912 


Stock, grain, some hogs 


138 acres— 115.7 culti- 
vated 


14,629 


26 


Gallatin Valley, Montana, 
1913-14 


Stock and grain 


255 acres — 182 cultivated 


27,173 


27 


Eastern Nebraska, 1912- 
1914 


Stock and grain 


208 acres — 158 cultivated 


26,543 


28 


Southeastern Minnesota, 
1912 


Stock and grain 


135 acres — 105 cultivated 


14,401 


29 


Seven counties of Utab, 
1914 


Forage, hay, grain, sugar 
beets, and stock 


106 acres — 54 cultivated 


11,886 


30 


Monmouth County, New 
Jersey, 1914 


Potatoes, corn, wheat, and 
hay 


98 acres — 73 cultivated 


17,673 



* The numbers in this column refer to the prefix numbers in the list of Farm Management Surveys 
page 326) where a description of the conditions surrounding the collection of data can be found. 



240 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Classification of Capital Requirements — as Owner. — Segregation of 
the total capital need as shown in the preceding table into requirements 
for land, buildings, work stock, operating capital, etc. gives an idea of the 
way to budget available appropriations for farm purposes : 

Table 67. — Classification of Capital Requirements — as Owner 



Locality 



Total in- 
vestment 



Land House 



other 
buildings 



Live 


Machin- 


stock 


ery 


$ 772 


$311 


1,436 


587 


1,184 


386 


485 


129 


1,400 




1,064 


333 


596 


173 


3,147 


663 


727 


258 


1,258 


400 


1,385 


477 


957 


319 


892 


319 


1,859 


271 


2,521 


817 


1,793 


398 


1,632 


520 


2,107 


449 


1,394 


847 



Feed 



Southern New Hampshire 

Chester County, Pennsylvania 

Sumter County, Georgia 

White 

Colored 

Lower Rio Grande '. 

Irrigated District of Texas 

Brooks Country, Georgia 

Anderson County, South Carolina. . . 
Irrigated valleys of Southern Arizona 

Ellis County, Texas 

Lenawee County, Michigan 

Willamette Valley, Oregon 

Washington County, Ohio 

Central New York 

Johnson County, Missouri 

Gallatin Valley, Montana 

Eastern Nebraska 

Southeastern Minnesota 

Seven Counties of Utah 

Monmouth County, New Jorspy 



$ 5,350.00 
10,486.00 

13,773.00 

5,895.00 

14,000.00 

8,992.00 

8,940.00 

20,706.00 

16,153.00 

11,756.00 

22,700.00 

6,378.00 

5,576.00 

14,629.00 

27,173.00 

26,543.00 

14,401,00 

11,886.00 

17,673.00 



(All real estate $4,124) 
$ 3,019 82,464 2,569 



8,952 
4,332 
10,000 



937 
347 
800 



4,970 1,154 
(All real estate 



14,452 


1,470 


13,342 


937 


6,983 


1,317 



(All real estate 
2,934| 1,020 I 
(All real estate 
(All real estate 
(All real estate 



21,727 


1,053 


9,592 


1,217 


7,482 


1,056 


9,098 


2,879 



1,253 
395 
400 

364 

$7,748) 

393 

420 

1,340 

$20,702) 

829 

$4,070) 

$2,074) 

$ 23,252) 

1,036 

1,160 

412 

2,168 



128 
262 



251 
350 

809 
423 
497 
468 
388 
147 
478 
223 
425 
583 
536 
280 
380 
1,287 



Classification of Capital Requirements — Ohio. — Amount and distri- 
bution of investment in 21 Ohio farms studied in 1909^^ averaged: 

Table 68. — Classification of Capital Requirements — Ohio^^ 



Acreage 

Investment 

Investment 

Land 

Farm buildings 

Household building 

Fences 

Drainage 

Water supply 

Live stock 

Machinery, etc 

Produce, supplies, etc 



Range 



49.6 to 388.9 acres 
$4,472 to $34,563 



Average 



165.88 acres 
$15,093 



Range, Per cent 



32 


9- 


-67 


5 


4 


3- 


-21 


4 


4 


6- 


-19 


1 





5- 


- 6 


3 






-11 


9 





3- 


- 4 


9 


5 


0—21 


5 


3 


2- 


-14 


1 


1 


0- 


- 7 


4 



Average 

per cent 

50.8 

10.2 

10.0 

3.5 

2.4 

1.1 

12.5 

5.1 

4.2 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 241 

Capital Requirements of Apple Orchards. — Average investments 
in apple orchards resulted in findings from studies as follows :^^ 

Table G9. — Capital Requirements of Apple Orchards 



Region 


Year of 
study 


No. of 
orchards 


Investment 

per acre of 

bearing 

orchard 


Wenatchee Valley, Washington 

Western Colorado 


1914 
1914-15 
1915 
1915 
1915 


87 
125 

54 
120 

38 


$1,925 
708 


Hood River Valley, Oregon 

Yakima Valley, Washington 

Payette Valley, Idaho 


990 

1,531 

613 









Capital Required by Irrigation Farmers. — Data compiled to show all 
capital required for 20- 40- and 60-acre irrigated farms on projects of 
the Reclamation Service/^ lead to certain useful conclusions based on 
averages. Capital requirements, as has been pointed out, vary with the 
individual. The figures following are for costs of improvement, equip- 
ment, feed, seed, trees, and new equipment, including work on buildings 
by the farmer assisted by a carpenter, but not including cost of household 
goods or living, since these vary with the tastes, desires, and frugality 
of the family. The projects vary, being intensive, semi-intensive, and 
diversified. 

The figures are based on pre-war prices. They are for minimum 
requirements. 

Costs for 20-acre Farm. Structures. — Buildings and other structures 
for a 20-acre irrigated farm such as house, barn, granary or fruit shed, 
other buildings, fences, well and ditch structures, range from $900 to 
$1,700, totals which may be reduced about $300 for the warmer climates 
if the operator is disposed to be contented with the accompanying 
inconveniences. 

Other Equipment. — Equipment, such as soil tools, seeding tools, 
harvesting tools, sprayers, harness, vehicles, small tools, range from 
$280 to $410. Stock — i.e., horses, cattle, hogs, sheep, fowls, and bees — 
range from $345 to $565. 

Operating Expense. — Allowance for feed ranges from $380 to $460; for 
seeds and trees, $180. 

Totals for 20-acre Farm.— These figures total from $2,085 to $3,315. 



16 



242 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Costs for 40-acre Farm. — Totals for a 40-acre irrigated farm range as 
follows : 

Range 

Buildings $1 , 100 to $1 ,900 • 

Equipment 335 to 1 ,085 

Stock 570 to 793 

Feed 390 to 520 

Seed and trees 150 

Grand total $2,545 to $4,450 

These figures may be reduced by $350 for the warmer climates and if 
the operator is disposed to be contented with the accompanying 
inconveniences. 

Costs for 60-acre Farm. — For a 60-acre irrigated farm the estimated 
capital needs for equipment are : 

Range 

Buildings $1,250 to $2,080 

Equipment ' " 605 to 1,315 

Stock 795 to 1,120 

Feed 580 to 800 

Seed and trees 175 

Grand total $3 ,405 to $5 ,490 

Here again the figures are susceptible of a reduction of about $350. 

Irrigation Costs. — To these figures must be added a payment for water 
rights, overhead and maintenance charge of irrigation facilities, land 
payment, living, and extra labor where needed. 

Estimated Returns. — In the same body of data estimated farm returns 
and increased stock values for the first 3 years of operation on farms in 
Reclamation projects run as follows : 

Table 70. — Estimated Returns from Reclamation District Farms 

Small Fair Good 
20-acre farm 

First year $150 $ 300 $ 400 

Second year '. . . 320 530 660 

Third year 380 560 680 

40-acre farm 

First year 270 430 530 

Second year 560 730 900 

Third year 730 900 1 , 100 

60-acre farm 

First year 320 560 640 

Second year 640 840 900 

Third year 800 1 , 100 1 , 180 

Capital for California Farms. — A study of capital required by the 
average California family farm brought out results as shown in the follow- 
ing tables, which in themselves are self-explanatory. Figures were based 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 243 

on estimates made by experienced and qualified farmers for the size of 
business considered to be correct for the average farm family doing most 
of the work without employing outside help. Figures are for 1919. 
The tables are instructive, as indicating the extent of capital needs in 
different types of farming commonly engaged in. 

Type of Business and Size of Farm. — According to type of business the 
area of farms was found to range in size and to average, thus: 

Table 71. — Size qf Family Farm — California 

Business Range Average 

Grain 80-640 acres 320 acres 

Fruit 10-40 acres 20 acres 

Poultry 1 ,500-3,000 fowls 2,500 fowls 

Dairying 10-30 cows 20 cows 

Diversified farming 10-80 acres 40 acres 

These five examples have been selected from the various types of 
agriculture as being of rather general interest. 

Costs of Equipping. — With costs as of 1919 the total to equip and 
establish each of these five types represent capital outlay as follows. 
For grain, 320 acres at $100 an acre, the total is $40,172, of which $32,000 
goes for land and $8,712 for equipment. The fruit land, 20 acres at $250 
requires $10,178, of which $5,000 is for land, and $5,178 for equipment. 
Ten acres are enough for a family-sized poultry project, which at $500 
makes a land investment of $5,000, to which is to be added $8,797 to 
cover the necessary equipment — a total of $13,797. Dairy farming 
means an average of 20 cows, for which 30 acres of land are considered 
necessary, costing $7,500, with equipment costing $7,400, bringing the 
total investment to $14,900. The diversified farm is usually a 40-acre 
place, valued in its undeveloped state at $200 an acre, which with the 
equipment, $6,511, means a total of $14,511. Acreages are in each in- 
stance, in the opinion of farmers conducting similar businesses, those 
needed to insure a satisfactory family living and to meet the ordinary 
operating requirements. A small balance to cover profit, to make im- 
provements, or to discharge financial obligations, could be counted upon 
for ordinary conditions if the operator is a practical farmer. 

Costs of Operating .—To the costs of obtaining land and equipment, 
must be added two additional items, if full capital requirements are to 
be covered. These are (1) operating sums necessary to bring the farm, 
to its maximum stage of production, and (2) sums incident to the oper- 
ation of the business after it is established. 



244 FARM MANAGEMENT 

These totals for the businesses here under consideration are : 

Table 72. — Capital Requirements for Operating — Frv^E Selected California 

Farm Businesses 

Kind of farming 



Grain 

Fruit 

Poultry 

Dairy 

Diversified farming. 



To ESTABLISH BUSINESS 


After business 


LESS POSSIBLE BETURNS 


IS established 


$3,800 


$2,800 


4,050 


2,600 


1,825 


8,750 


3,875 


2,100 


3,900 


2,650 



Total Operating Costs. — From the above may be determined the total 
requirements, which are, for grain, S6,600; for fruit, $6,650; for poultry, 
$10,575; for dairying $5,975; for diversified farming $6,550. 

Total Costs. — Summarizing all needs results in these totals. 

Table 73. — Total Capital Requirements for Five Selected California Farm 

Businesses 





Acreage 


Total 
capital 
needs 


Made up of 


Business 


Land 


Equip- 
ment 


Operating 
sums 


Grain 


320 
20 ■ 
10 
30 
40 


$47,312 
16,828 
24,372 
20,875 
21,061 


$32,000 
5,000 
5,000 
7,500 
8,000 


$8,712 
5,178 
8,797 
7,400 
6,511 


$ 6,600 


Fruit 


6,650 


Poultry 


10,575 


Dairy 


5,975 


Diversified farming 


6,550 



Capital Requirements of Tenant Farming. — To show that ways are 
open of getting started with less capital than as owner, a table comparing 
the capital needs of tenants and owners is shown below. Averaging 
these sections indicates that less than 15 per cent as much capital is 
needed to rent as to own. 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 245 
Table 74. — Capital Requirements of Tenanting Compared with Owning 







Farms operated by 


Farms operated by 




State from whence data 




tenants 




owners 


Key* 


Aver- 


Aver- 




Aver- 


Aver- 




No. 


were obtained 


age 


age 




age 


age 








total 


tilled 


Capital 


total 


tilled 


Capital 






acre- 


acre- 




acre- 


acre- 








age 


age 




age 


age 




3 


Indiana, Illinois, Iowa .... 


172 




$2,431 


178 




$30,606 


4 


Pennsylvania 


106 


75 


2,244 


90 


63.9 


10,486 


7 


Georgia 




85 


890 




158.0 


13,773 


9 


Utah 


89 


79 


1,117 


64 


45.0 


11,688 


14 


Arizona 


126 




3,785 


95 




20,706 


16 


Michigan 


102 




1,765 


104 




11,756 


21 


New York 


127 
134 


87 
112 


1,281 
1,547 


103 
136 


72.0 
114.0 


5,527 


23 


Missouri 


12,555 


28 


Montana 


275 


203 


3,239 


255 


182.0 


27,677 


27 


Nebraska 


200 


158 


3,335 


214 


149.0 


27,078 


28 


Minnesota 


151 


116 


1,680 


135 


105,0 


14,636 


30 


New Jersey 


165 


78 


3,699 


106 


66,0 


14,582 









* Refers to number affixed to list in chapter discussing farm management surveys. 

Capital Under Tenanting Compared with Owning — California. — In 

the next table are exhibited the lesser requirements under share tenanting 
as compared with ownership for the selected California businesses 
discussed above under "Capital for California Farms." Note the 
substantial decrease in total capital requirements of lands rented on 
shares as contrasted with ownership needs. 



Table 75. — Capital Requirements of Owner and Tenant — Family Farms — 

California 

Crop As owner As tenant 

Grain $47,312 $2,800 

Fruit 16,828 2,600 

Poultry 24,372 5,550 

Dairy 20,875 2,100 

Diversified farming 21 , 061 2 , 650 

Effect of Type of Farm Business upon Capital. — Numerous examples 
can be found in every locality showing the effect of the type of business 
upon capital requirements. So variable are farming conditions that 
each proposition, to a very large extent, must be worked out separately. 



246 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



The farm surveys illustrate these effects of different kinds of business 
upon capital. 

Desirability of Testing Capital Requirements When a Choice of 
Business is Possible. — When a choice of enterprise is possible on a given 
farm, study should be made of the effect of each possible industry in its 
relation to capital needs. 

For example, an 80-acre alfalfa farm which could be used (a) to produce hay, (6) 
for dairying, or (c) for hog raising, required nearly three times as much capital for 
dairying as for hay raising, and twice as much for dairying as for hogs. Leaving 
the land value out of account, since it is common to all three, the details, based on 1919 
data, gave: 

Table 76. — Effect of Type of Business upon Capital Requirements — Alfalfa 
FOR Hay, Hogs, or Dairying 





Total 
equip- 
ment 
costs 


Made up of 


Work- 
stock 
and 
harness 




80-acre alfalfa 
used for 


Build- 
ings 


Fences 


Imple- 
ment and 
machin- 
ery 


Live 
stock 


Hay 

Hogs 

Dairying 


$ 5,519 

8,314 

15,770 


$2,670 
2,918 
3,729 


$ 505 

1,170 

600 


$1,183 
1,115 
2,067 


$1,161 
791 
474 


none 

$2 , 320 

6,900 



California Data. — Collection of California data in 1919 illustrates the 
capital needs of different businesses: 

Table 77. — Effect of Type of Business upon Capital Requirements — 

California 



Kind of business 


No. of records 


Average size 
of farm, 
acres 


Average capi- 
tal require- 
ments 


Fruit 

Field crops 

Poultrv 


38 

23 

21 

6 


81 

140 

26 

474 


$18,120 

16,418 

8,671 


Live stock 


29.407 







Sources of Capital. ^^ Banks. — In providing capital for farm-mortgage 
loans, banks appear to furnish from their own funds approximately 
$740,000,000, or more than one-fifth of the total amount invested in 
farm mortgages in the United States. So far as the bank funds in any 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 247 

State invested in farm mortgages represent local capital, there is the 
advantage of first-hand contact with borrowers, of enabling the investor 
to see that the security is properly cared for during the term of the loan. 
The banks in certain sections, such as the New England and the Middle 
Atlantic States, which customarily lend in other States, lack this advan- 
tage, and must operate through other agencies in placing their loans. 

Life Insurance Companies. — Life insurance companies supply approxi- 
mately $700,000,000 for farm-mortgage capital in the United States. 
Substantially one-half of this insurance money is invested in the four 
States of Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska. Iowa alone holds 
nearly 22 per cent of the total amount of insurance money invested in 
farm mortgages. In most of the Southern or Rocky Mountain States the 
insurance funds invested in farm mortgages do not represent more than 
one-half of 1 per cent of the total farm-mortgage capital. 

The life insurance companies either have their own farm-mortgage 
departments, through which they receive and pass on applications for 
loans, or they purchase farm mortgages outright in the commercial market. 
The latter practice generally is limited to the smaller insurance com- 
panies, the volume of whose business in this field is not sufficient to 
warrant their establishing separate machinery for the selection of farm- 
mortgage securities. 

On the other hand, the larger insurance companies, which invest 
considerable amounts in farm mortgages, have very well organized de- 
partments, through which they carry on a regular farm-mortgage loan 
business. They usually limit their loans to territory such as they can 
approve for this purpose, and hire salaried appraisers, whose inspec- 
tion of a given property is required before the application is finally 
accepted. Ordinarily these companies receive applications through local 
agencies or correspondents, usually local banks. The application blanks 
and legal papers used by these insurance companies, including mort- 
gages and potes, have been carefully standardized and adapted to the 
conditions in the various States w'here loans are made. While some 
of the companies show a tendency to make loans at relatively high 
rates, insurance companies more often represent a highly conserva- 
tive class of investors in the farm-mortgage business. Their advent 
into any given State for investment purposes usually leads to a lower- 
ing of charges on farm mortgages. Local investors often are governed 
in their charges by the practices of competing insurance companies. 

Percentage of Farm-mortgage Loans Held bij BanJcs and Life Insurance 
Companies. — The following table shows the extent of banks and insurance 
companies as factors in financing farm loans for the individual states: 



248 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Table 78. — Percentage of Farm-mortgage Loans Held by Banks and Life 

Insurance Companies 



Geographic division and state 



Farm mortgages 
held by life in- 
surance companies 


Farm mortgages 
held by banks 


Percentage of 


Percentage of 


estimated total 


estimated total 


0.1 


43.7 




20.5 


0.1 


27.3 


* 


36.2 




23.9 


0.4 


29.4 


0.1 


10.8 


0.6 


7.3 


0.2 


9.2 


13.1 


20.1 


36.9 


39.3 


14.3 


15.8 


1.4 


37.8 


1.2 


19.7 


24.5 


30.0 


32.0 


22.3 


26.8 


15.6 


19.4 


5.0 


33.6 


6.7 


40.4 


6.3 


35.7 


6.4 


0.7 


23.3 


1.5 


18.5 


2.7 


20.0 


0.3 


19.5 


10.8 


32.9 


15.6 


36.1 


52.1 


26.9 


1.5 


57.9 


17.4 


32.2 


41.9 


• 15.7 


6.8 


14.3 


9.5 


36.6 


20.3 


27.1 


7.1 


42.6 


39.7 


2.9 


20.5 


6.0 


20.6 


30.4 


13.7 


10.2 


6.8 


16.8 


8.5 


5.7 


26.0 


8.7 


9.0 


38.5 


12.6 


88.0 


0.5 


35.2 


7.1 


11.6 


3.1 


11.5 


8.1 


45.0 



New England: 

Maine 

New Hampshire, 

Vermont 

Massachusetts. . 

Rhode Island. . . 

Connecticut. . . . 
Middle Atlantic: 

New York 

New Jersey 

Pennsylvania. . . 
East North Central: 

Ohio 

Indiana 

Illinois 

Michigan 

Wisconsin 

West North Central: 

Minnesota 

Iowa 

Missouri 

North Dakota. . 

South Dakota. . 

Nebraska 

Kansas 

South Atlantic: 

Delaware 

Maryland 

Virginia 

West Virginia. . . 

North Carolina. 

South Carolina. 

Georgia 

Florida 

East South Central: 

Kentucky 

Tennessee 

Alabama 

Mississippi 

West South Central: 

Arkansas 

Louisiana 

Oklahoma 

Texas 

Mountain: 

Montana 

Idaho 

Wyoming 

Colorado 

New Mexico. . . . 

Arizona 

Utah 

Nevada 

Pacific: 

Washington. . . . 

Oregon 

California 



■ Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent. 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 249 

Mortgage Companies. — Mortgage companies figure prominently in 
the farm-mortgage business in all parts of the country, and include a 
number of foreign companies which have invested heavily in farm mort- 
gages in the West South Central, Rocky Mountain, and Pacific States. 

School and Land-grant Funds. — Approximately $25,000,000 is loaned 
from school or land-grant funds directly to farmers in certain States, 
such as Indiana, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Idaho, 
Utah, and Oregon. The interest charge on these loans is usually 5 or 6 
per cent, though in Idaho the rate is 7 per cent. These loans are hand- 
led directly from the State departments in North and South Dakota, 
Oklahoma, Idaho, Utah, and Oregon; in Indiana and Iowa, however, the 
loans are handled through the counties, which are held responsible for all 
losses on account of insufficient security or through defalcations by county 
officers. In certain States, such as New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, 
and Wisconsin, the amount of capital supplied by private investors is 
relatively large. 

Factors Which Influence Terms on Farm-mortgage Loans. — The 
careful investor in farm mortgages considers all the known factors 
affecting the income of the farm offered as security. He studies (a) 
the relation of farm income to price of land, (6) the degree of regulai'ity 
in income from year to year, (c) the tendencies in the direction of diver- 
sified agriculture, (d) the business habits of the farm owners and the kind 
of care given to the farm products. 

Method of Farming. — Farm-mortgage investors, in determining their 
attitude toward loans in a given area, give greatest consideration to the 
prevailing method of farming. 

Climatic Conditions. — Climatic conditions are important in their effect 
on the value of the farm security. The semi-arid regions of the Western 
States do not attract capital as freely as the farming sections further 
east, where rain is relatively abundant. Important sources of capital, 
including insurance companies and savings banks, often refuse to loan 
money on farm-mortgage security where the average rainfall is below a 
certain figure. 

Soil and Topography. — The character of the soil and the general 
contour of the country are also important. Capital does not flow as 
freely to southern Illinois as to other parts of that State, partly because 
of differences in soil conditions. Similarly, the Red River Valley, in the 
northern part of Minnesota and Nortn Dakota, attracts capital relatively 
more freely than north-central Minnesota, largely because of differences in 
natural conditions. Illustrations of the effect of soil, contour, and cli- 
mate on the flow of farm-mortgage capital could also be given from other 
parts. of the country. 

Remoteness. — The distance from financial centers is an important fac- 
tor. In studying the average interest rates for the different States, a 



250 FARM MANAGEMENT 

gradual rise in costs is noted as one moves outward from the leading 
financial centers. 

Financial Agencies. — The character of the financial agencies through 
which farm-mortgage capital reaches the farmer is also of great impor- 
tance. One needs to consider the part played by agencies that render 
local savings available for this purpose, as well as the kinds of facilities 
through which outside capital reaches the farmers of any given locality. 
Where local savings institutions have been well developed, as in Iowa or 
California, the effect on available local capital for farm-loan purposes is 
readily discerned. On the other hand, the result of a general lack of 
suitable local savings institutions, as shown especially in many regions of 
the South and West, is likewise apparent. 

Banking. — Ninety-five per cent of the country's business is done by 
credit currency, such as checks, drafts, money orders, notes, and the like. 

Advantages of Banking. — Banking carries with it many advantages: 

1. The depositor's credit and influence are measured largely by the size and 
regularity of his bank account. 

2. A tendency to economize by a desire to increase the bank balance. 

3. The banker becomes bookkeeper and business counselor. 

4. Security against fire and robbers. 

5. Indorsed checks are both records and receipts of payment. 

6. A benefit to the community by keeping the money in circulation. 

7. Convenience in making change. 

8. The bank will always loan to a good depositor in preference to one who is not a 
depositor. 

Banks usually welcome small accounts, for the small account of today 
may be the large account of tomorrow, while there is always the possi- 
bility that a depositor, though small, may serve to attract another and 
larger depositor. 

Using Banking Credit. — The young farmer, other things being fairly 
equal, will wisely choose for his bank that institution from which he is 
most likely to be able to borrow money. 

The big city bank usually makes a business of loaning on stock 
exchange collateral and not on real estate, for land, though safe for per- 
manent investment, is not at all liquid. Such an institution can not 
loan on ordinary commercial paper as it is issued today in this country. 

Banks of this character consider only the highest grade railroad bonds, 
the receivables or other business paper of the big corporations and so- 
called trusts, and the loans of brokers on stock exchange collateral. 

The bank the young business man will naturally select is an institu- 
tion that will assume risks and will loan at 6 per cent to a local store- 
keeper even when it can obtain the same rate from a great railroad 
corporation; in fact, the best bank for the young business man often is 
the bank that is operated by men who are unfamiliar with bonds and 
other listed securities, and who have no facilities for buying the high- 
grade commercial paper of the great industrial trusts. 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 251 

Crop and Stock Mortgages. — Use of crops and stock as collateral to 
secure loans from banks is a common method in obtaining money. 
Ownership in the collateral offered must be unquestionable and clear. 

Example of a Crop and Stock Mortgage. — A common example of a crop 
and stock mortgage follows: 

THIS MORTGAGE, made this First day of May, 19 by 

of the County of Kings, State of California, by occupation Ranchers hereinafter designated as Mort- 
gagor, to BANK & TRUST COMPANY OF CENTRAL CALIFORNIA, a corporation of the County 
of Fresno, by Occupation Banking corporation hereinafter designated as Mortgagee. 

WITNESSETH: That as security for the payment of a promissory note of which the following is a 
copy, to- wit: 

$5,000.00 Fresno, Cal. May 1, 1919 No. 

On Demand after date, without grace, for value received, I promise to pay to the BANK AND 
TRUST COMPANY OF CENTRAL CALIFORNIA (a corporation), or order, at its Banking House 
in Fresno, California, the sum of Five thousand and No/100 Dollars with interest thereon at the rate 
of Seven per cent, per annum from date until paid. Interest to be paid Quarterly and if not so paid as 
it becomes due, to bear interest at the same rate as said principal sum, but if default be made in the 
payment of interest, then the principal sum of this note shall immediately become due at the option 
of the holder hereof. If suit is brought to collect his note, I agree to pay a reasonable attorney's fee 
together with all legal expenses incurred for collection. All payments which become due are to be made 
in United States Gold Co in 



This note secured by a Crop Mtg. and a Chattel Mtg. of even date 
$1.00 in U. S. I. R. Stamps placed on original note and duly canceled 

and also the repayment of all advances by the Mortgagee or assigns to the Mortgagor not exceeding 
the sum of Ten thousand and No/100 Dollars, and also of all expenses, including attorney's fees incurred 
by the Mortgagee in enforcing or protecting this security, or protecting the property hereby mortgaged, 
with interest on such advances and expenses from dates when made and incurred, at the rate stipulated 
in said note, the Mortgagor mortgages to the Mortgagee all the crops of Alfalfa, 191 acres. Wheat, 
187 acres, Barley, 282 acres, Oats, 70 acres, and other annual crops growing or to be grown thereon; 
growing and to be grown and produced during the year 1919, upon that real property situate in the 
County of Kings, State of California, described as follows, to-wit: 

The so-called "Ranch" comprising Section 11, and portions of Section 2, 10 and 12, Township 18 
South, Range 20 East Mt. Diablo Base and Meridian Kings County, State of California, embracing 
1,088 acres more or less. 

And it is agreed that the Mortgagor will care for and protect the mortgaged property until it is 
fit for harvest, and will then pick, cure and deliver it to the Mortgagee, or assigns who may sell the 
same at private sale without demand of performance or notice; that the Mortgagee at all times may 
enter upon the premises to view said mortgaged property and in case default be made by Mortgagor 
in the payment on said day, or in any of the conditions herein to be performed by the Mortgagor, 
and said default continued for 10 days after written demand of performance, then the Mortgagee or 
assigns, shall be entitled to and may take possession of the Mortgaged property, care for, pick, cure 
and pack the same, and without demand of performance or notice may, at either public or private sale, 
without notice, sell the mortgaged property, cured or uncured, in such market as the Mortgagee may 
select, and from the proceeds thereof may retain all expenses incurred and the debt hereby secured, 
and the costs and Attorney's fees incurred in enforcing this security. 

WITNESS the hand and seal of the Mortgagor the day and year first above written. 

Signed, Sealed and Delivered in the Presence of: (Seal) 

(Seal ) 



(Seal) 



(Seal) 



(Followed with spaces for notary attestments) 



Use of Credit. — The first and most important rule to be observed 
in the use of farm credit, as pointed out by Carver,**^ is "to make sure that 
it is for a productive purpose, that is to say, make sure that the purpose 
for which the borrowed money is to be used will produce a return greater 



252 FARM MANAGEMENT 

than needed to pay the debt. Except in extreme cases, it is bad policy 
to borrow for the purpose of purchasing anything which will not help to pay 
for itself. As a rule, the purchase of these things should be postponed 
until the farmer has accumulated the wherewithal out of his own 
earnings. " 

Continuing, Carver suggests certain fundamental principles which 
should govern in the use of farm credit. Briefly these are: 

(a) The length of time the debt is to run should have a close relation to the produc- 
tive life of the improvement for which the money is borrowed. This will do away with 
the necessity of having the loan frequently renewed, and it will free the borrower from 
subjection to an unscrupulous lender who might refuse to renew a short-time loan and 
insist on foreclosure. 

(6) Provision should be made in the long-time loan for the gradual reduction of the 
principal. There are two well-recognized ways of doing this. One is to provide in 
the note that, on any interest date, the borrower may, if he so desires, repay a part of 
the principal. As the principal is gradually reduced the annual interest charge is 
likewise reduced, and by paying the same sum annually, the debt is gradually wiped 
out. Another method is to provide in the note itself for a definite rate of amortization 
by fixed annual or semi-annual payments. Each of these fixed payments not only 
pays the interest but a small part of the principal besides, eventually wiping it out 
completely. Farmers are strongly advised, in all long-time loans, to insist on one or 
the other of these methods of repayment. It may be necessary to organize and work 
together in order to secure these and other favorable terms. 

(c) As low interest rates as possible should be secured. Interest rates, like prices 
in general, depend upon the law of supply and demand. When there is more loanable 
capital in a community than is wanted by the borrowers of that community, the rate 
of interest is low and the borrowers can dictate terms. When there is less loanable 
cacpital than is wanted by borrowers, interest is high and lenders dictate terms. 
Obviously, therefore, it is to the interest of the borrowers to increase the number of 
lenders, or, at least to increase the amount of loanable capital in their community. 

Amortization Method of Paying Loans. — When it can be effected, the 
amortization method of paying farm loans offers a simple and in general 
a satisfactory way of paying loans. Amortization in relation to farm 
loans means the payment of a long time loan in installments, usually 
annual or semi-annual, covering both interest and principal. For 
example, if $1,000 is borrowed at 5 per cent interest, to be paid back in 
20 annual installments on the amortization plan, a payment of $80.24 at 
the end of each year for 20 years will cancel the debt. 

Out of amortization payments an amount is taken sufficient to cover 
interest on unpaid principal, the balance being applied to the immediate 
reduction of the principal. Payments are made at the end of the year. 
Thus a new and smaller principal results each year and hence a smaller 
and smaller interest charge and a proportionately larger payment on 
in principal. ^^ 

Prevailing Interest Rates. — A study conducted by the United States 
Department of Agriculture to determine costs and sources of farm- 
mortgage loans in the United States, the results of which were published 
July, 1916'^2 shows: 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 253 



Table 79. — Prevailing Average Rates in the United States for Interest 

AND Commission 



Geographic division and state 



Average 

interest 

rate 



Average 

annual 

commission 



Interest 

plus 

commission 



New England: 

Maine 

New Hampshire 

Vermont 

' Massachusetts. . 

Rhode Island. . . 

Connecticut. . . . 
Middle Atlantic: 

New York 

New Jersey 

Pennsylvania. . . 
East North Central: 

Ohio 

Indiana 

Illinois 

Michigan 

Wisconsin 

West North Central: 

Minnesota 

Iowa 

Missouri 

North Dakota. . 

South Dakota. . 

Nebraska 

Kansas 

South Atlantic: 

Delaware 

Maryland 

Virginia 

West Virginia. . . 

North Carolina. 

South Carolina. 

Georgia 

Florida 

East South Central: 

Kentucky 

Tennessee 

Alabama 

Mississippi 

West South Central: 

Arkansas 

Louisiana 

Oklahoma 

Texas 

Mountain: 

Montana 

Idaho 

Wyoming 

Colorado 

New Mexico. . . . 

Arizona 

Utah 

Pacific: 

Washington. ... 

Oregon 

California 



2 
9 

3 
1 

6 
7 
6.1 
6.2 
6.3 
7.8 
7.6 
9.0 

6.7 
7.3 

8.7 
8.0 

9.0 
8.2 
6.6 
8.4 

8.4 
8.2 
9.2 
8.3 
9.7 
9.1 



(1) 
(1) 
(1) 
( 
(1) 



0.3 

0.2 
0.4 
0.3 
0.3 
0.1 

0.5 
0.3 
0.6 
1.8 
1.0 
0.8 
0.8 



(1) 



0.4 
0.7 
0.2 
1.4 
0.6 
1.1 
0.6 

0.4 
0.6 
0.7 
0.5 

0.6 
0.4 
1.8 
0.6 

1.6 
0.7 
0.8 
0.6 
0.8 
0.3 
0.4 

0.8 
0.3 
0.2 



5.6 
5.8 
5.8 

6.1 
6.2 
6.0 
6.6 
5.8 

6.8 
5.9 
6.8 
8.7 
8.0 
7.1 
6.9 

5.6 
6.1 
6.8 
6.4 
7.7 
8.4 
8.7 
9.6 

7.1 

7.9 
9.4 

8.5 

9.6 
8.6 
8.4 
9.0 

10.0 
8.9 

10.0 
8.9 

10.5 
9.4 
9.0 

8.7 
8.0 
7.6 



1 Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent. 



254 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Commissions. — The commission figures used in making up this table 
represent the average annual commission, or where a single advance com- 
mission is paid on a long-term loan, the equivalent annual commission. 
It will be seen that, in general, the average costs for interest and commis- 
sion together are highest in the Southern and Rocky Mountain States, and 
that the lowest figures appear in the New England and Middle Atlantic 
States and the more highly developed agricultural sections of the corn belt. 
The average commissions are shown to be especially high in certain 
States, notably North Dakota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Montana. 

Range in Interest Rates. — The range in interest rates for the various 
States is indicated in the next table. ^^ 
Table 80. — Range in Interest Rates in Different States (Round Numbers) 



Geographic division 
and state 



Percentage of total number of replies showing, for interest plus 
commission, a rate of 



5 per 
cent 



6 per 
cent 



7 per 
cent 



8 per 
cent 



9 per 
cent 



10 per 
cent 



11 per 
cent 



12 per 

cent 

or. over 



New England: . 

Maine 

New Hampshire. 

Vermont 

Massachusetts. . 

Rhode Island. . . 

Connecticut 

Middle Atlantic: 

New York 

New Jersey. ... 

Pennsylvania. . . 
East North Central: 

Ohio 

Indiana 

Illinois 

Michigan 

Wisconsin 

West North Central: 

Minnesota 

Iowa 

Missouri 

North Dakota. . 

South Dakota. . 

Nebraska 

Kansas 

South Atlantic: 

Delaware 

Maryland 

Virginia 

West Virginia. . 

North Carolina. 

South Carolina. 

Georgia 

Florida 

East South Central: 

Kentucky 

Tennessee 

Alabama 

Mississippi 

West South Central: 

Arkansas 

Louisiana 

Oklahoma 

Texas 

Mountain: 

Montana 

Idaho 

Wyoming 

Colorado 

New Mexico. . . . 

Arizona 

Utah 

Pacific: 

Washington 

Oregon 

California 



4 
75 
26 
3.5 
33 
26 

38 
33 
32 



3 

23 

4 

34 

.5 

13 

1 

2 
5 
1 

38 
9 
2 



77 
25 
74 
65 
50 
74 

58 
57 
57 

75 
78 
53 
50 
51 

46 
77 
45 
2 
20 
42 
44 

63 

74 
53 
80 
40 



45 
19 

1 



17 



4 
7 
9 

15 
15 
21 
35 
13 

27 
9 
30 
17 
25 
20 
37 



14 
29 



22 
6 



17 

20 

2 



10 
16 
37 



17 
28 
18 
14 
11 



3 
12 
10 
16 
64 
43 
24 

24 
33 
33 
46 

13 

58 
44 
34 

10 
36 
18 
26 
7 
36 
33 

40 
53 
43 



4 
20 



21 
27 
13 

5 

9 

16 

14 

18 
14 
15 
IS 

16 
34 
12 
22 
19 
9 
27 

31 
13 



2 
27 
14 
10 

4 



2 

7 
5 

15 
52 



19 
32 
21 

60 
14 
22 
30 

52 
19 
49 
16 
33 
45 
40 



*Rates are approximated to the nearest unit; tfaat is, rates from 5.50 per cent to 6.49 per cent are 
counted as 6 per cent, etc. 



THE CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS OF FARMING 255 



Legal Interest Rates and Statutes of Limitations. — The following 
table shows the rate of interest fixed by law, and the number of years 
that judgments, notes, and accounts may run before they expire and 
become no longer collectible under the law.^^ 

Table 81. — Legal Interest Rates and Statutes of Limitations of States 



State 



Legal rate, 
per cent 



By contract, 
per cent 



Statutes of 

limitations 

on notes 

(number of years) 



Alabama 

Arkansas 

Arizona 

California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

Delaware 

District of Columbia 

Florida 

Georgia 

Idaho 

Illinois 

Indian Territory. . . . 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland 

Massachusetts 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

New Hampshire 

New Jersey 

New Mexico 

New York 

North Carolina 

North Dakota 

Ohio 

Oklahoma 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania 

Rhode Island 

South Carolina 

South Dakota 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Utah 

Vermont 

Virginia 

Washington 

West Virginia 

Wisconsin 

Wyoming 



10 

Any 

Any 

Any 

6 

6 

10 

10 

8 

12 

7 

10 



10 

6 

8 
Any 

6 
Any 

7 
10 
10 

8 

Any 

10 

Any 

6 

6 
12 

6 

6 
12 

8 
12 
10 

6 
Any 

8 
12 

6 

10 

Any 

6 

6 
12 

6 
10 
12 



5 
4 
4 
6 

6 
3 
5 
6 
5 
10 

10 
10 
5 
15 
5 
6 
3 
6 
6 
6 



6 
6 
6 
3 
6 

15 
5 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
4 
6 
6 
5 
6 

10 
6 



256 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Days of Grace. — Days of grace on notes and drafts are given in the 
following states and territories; Alabama, Arkansas, South Dakota, 
Georgia, Indian Territory, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisana, 
Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New 
Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas and Wyoming. 



CHAPTER XII 
FARM PROFITS 

Farm profits is perliaps the most important subject in farm manage- 
ment, since profits are the goal of most farmers. Given a decent farm 
income, the value of the farm home and farm environment will prove 
itself. 

What the Business Should Pay. — From the farm-management view- 
point a profit accrues only after the farm business has met the different 
demands that any business should be called upon to meet before declaring 
a profit. Briefly these items consist of: 

(a) Repayment of all operating expenses, including the value of 
work done by the operator and his family, incurred in the growing of 
crops and stock and their rparketing, — whether these expenses be actual 
cash paid out for seed, feed, labor, rent, etc., or be represented by the value 
of homegrown products such as hay, grain, seed, etc., used in the pro- 
duction for sale of secondary products, or the product paid the owner in 
share renting. 

(b) Interest on the average investment, at the prevailing rates paid 
for the use of money. 

(c) Interest on moneys advanced for operating expenses. 

(d) A sum for management. 

(e) A sinking fund. 

(/) Depreciation of equipment or of plant. 

Any sum remaining over and above these items constitutes profit. 

Other Ideas of Profit. — This view differs considerably from the view 
often taken, which calls profit anything above operating expense, or 
which considers interest on the investment as profit, or which accepts as 
satisfactory profit, any sums above bare operating and depreciation 
allowances. 

The Business Should Be Credited with All Production. — Since, how- 
ever, the business is expected to meet all demands made upon it, the 
converse must hold — to credit the farm with all it produces not only for 
cash sale or for exchange, but for use upon the family table or for the 
family comfort. Only by fully following this plan is a real knowledge 
possible of what the farm is doing. 

Productive, Speculation, and Home Values. — In determining the 
interest charge, investment should be taken at its productive value; 
neither speculative nor home value should be included. By productive 
17 257 



258 FARM MANAGEMENT 

value is meant that sum invested in the business capable of paying the 
going rate of interest. For instance, if a given business pays a profit of 
$2,000 and the prevailing rate of interest is 5 per cent, the business is 
actually worth $40,000 for productive purposes. If the section is a 
desirable one in which to live, the actual market value may carry an 
additional sum to cover this, say $20,000. This figure represents home, 
environment, site, or living value, as it is variously called. If the outlook 
is for increased property values, a third addition may be forthcoming to 
meet a part of this potential or speculative value — the possible increase. 
If this sum be set at $5,000 for this example, the total market value of 
$65,000 reflects all three items — productive, home, and speculative. Yet 
from a financial stand-point the business should be asked to bear the 
going rate of interest only upon the productive value. If no home or 
speculative values attach, the determination of productive value is easy; 
but if the three are involved, care must be exercised in determining how 
much of any total investment represents sound immediate business worth. 

Reference to Determination of Land Values. — A further discussion 
of how to determine land values will be found in the chapter taking up 
inventory making (pages 348 to 356) and iri the chapter having to do 
with costs of production studies (pages 409 to 411). 

Deductions for Home and Speculative Values. — In many sections 
in respect of home value, a reduction must be made of as much as 50 per 
cent from the market price, and in respect of speculative value a reduction 
of as much as 25 per cent. Both speculative and home values should be 
ignored in determining the sum for which interest is demanded. 

Interest upon Operating Capital. — The charge for interest upon 
operating capital should include only moneys actually used in meeting 
the current expenses of the business. 

Charge for Management. — Since neither capital nor labor can produce 
profits without guidance and direction, a charge for management is a 
just one. A workable, ahd usually satisfactory, determination of what 
to charge can be obtained by using the prevailing salaries paid for similar 
duties, where the supervision is hired done, and where the superintendent 
or manager does no manual work. The business should then bear its 
prorates based on its size as compared with the usual size handled by 
paid men. For example, if the going wage is $250 cash and $50 per- 
quisites per month for superintending on diversified farms averaging 
640 acres, then the annual acreage charge amounts to approximately 
$5.50. An 80-acre place may justly be called upon to meet its proper 
prorata, or in this case, $440 for management. 

The Sinking Fund. — The sinking fund is a sum set aside during 
prosperous years to tide the business over dull times of crop failure, 
accident, disease, market slumps, etc., and is obtained by dividing the 
actual sum required during the off year by the number of prosperous 



FARM PROFITS 259 

years which can contribute. For example, if in a given deciduous fruit 
district a partial crop failure occurs about once in 5 years and the average 
farm needs $2,000 to carry it over the lull, the $2,000 represents the 
necessary sinking fund and is made up by charging the business with 
$500 per year for each of the four prosperous years. 

Depreciation Charge. — Depreciation covers the wear and tear of 
implements and machinery, the decay of buildings and fences, the ageing 
of work horses and other live stock; in other words, it covers the deter- 
mination of all things contributory to maintain the original values of 
the business which are subject to shrinking and the neglect of which would 
eventually mean the running down of the business to a point where new 
investment of capital must be made. Rates of depreciation and method 
of determining are covered later on in the chapter on Farm Bookkeeping 
(pages 356 to 362). 

Examples of Estimating What a Farm Business Should Pay. — Two 
examples, based on data perhaps applicable to but a single region, show 
the method of procedure in determining what the business should pay: 

Table 82. — Example of What a Farm Should Pay When Specializing in 
Barley Production (Farmed by Owner) 

Investment 

160 acres land at $60 $9 ,600 

Buildings 2,000 

Fences and other improvements 400 

16 head work-stock at $150 2 ,400 

Implements and machinery 600 

Working capital 1 , 000 

$16,000 

Annual Operating and Overhead Charges to be Met by Receipts 

Actual labor, horse and man, on crop at $4.25 $ 680 

Outlay for materials (seed, etc.) 700 

Interest on investment at 6 per cent 960 

Depreciation (12 per cent on stock, 10 per cent on imple- 
ments and machinery, 5 per cent on buildings) 448 

Taxes and Insurance 100 

Sinking fund ($1,200 wanted, covered by three crops in 

4 years) 400 

Management or executive ability (going wage is $960 for 640 

acres or $1.50 per acre) 240 

Sum which should be obtained $ 3 , 528 



260 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 83. — Example of What a Farm Should Pay When Specializing in Apple 
Production (Mature Orchard, Farmed by Owner) 

Investment 

20 acres orchard at $1 ,000 $20,000 

Buildings 2 , 400 

Tractor 480 

Small automobile 500 

Implements and machinery 200 

Working capital 600 



$24 , 180 



Annual Operating and Overhead Charges to be Met by Receipts 

Actual labor $ 1 , 920 

Outlay for materials (spray, etc.) 50 

Interest on investment at 6 per cent 1 , 350 

Depreciation (tractor $100, automobile $150, implements 

and machinery $20, buildings $120) 390 

Taxes and Insurance 160 

Sinking fund ($600 to be prorated over four good j^ears to 

cover a possible bad year once in five) 150 

Management or executive ability (going wage is $1,200 for 

100 acres or $12 per acre) 240 



$ 4,260 



Reasons for Demanding Full Returns of the Farm Business. — It is 

manifest that the total of the returns demanded is great enough materially 
to affect the size of the business. Unless a farmer receives pay for hie own 
labor and the labor of that portion of his family which works on the farm, 
proper returns for the use of his capital, and a bonus for his responsibilities 
and risks, he is not justified in continuing in the business. There is no 
justice or reason in asking farmers to produce at less than cost merely that 
consumers may be supplied with cheap food. Farmers in general, as 
they realize that this is happening, always curtail production until supply 
and demand have so interacted that returns are again sufficient properly 
to cover all reasonable cost and profit items. As agriculture is organized, 
some farmers are likely always to continue to produce at a loss, because 
contributing circumstances and ignorance will never be entirely wiped 
out. But as prices come nearer to meeting costs, then there tends to be 
a reduction in luxury production, a reduction in city populations, a 
quicker settling of farm labor problems, and a better use of now unpro- 
ductive lands. 

Labor Income as a Measure of Profits. — In order to compare the prof- 
its of groups of farmers use is made of "labor income," As explained in 
an earlier chapter labor income is the amount of money left over to reim- 
burse the operator for his labors — manual and supervisional, after 
deducting from the gross receipts all operating expenses, including deprecia- 



FARM PROFITS 



261 



tion, the value of any unpaid labor of other members of the family, and 
interest at the going rate upon the farm investment. The value of labor 
income as a measure of profits, in determining the profits of an individual 
farm or operator, is restricted; as said above, it is mainly useful when one 
wishes to make a comparison with group findings. Then, too, the farm 
management surveys report their conclusions in terms of labor income, 
findings of which are to follow. 

Table 84. — Table of Income Derived from Farming as Shown by Farm Survey 

Data 



Key 






Size of 


(a) 


(&) 


No.* 


Locality and year 


Type of farming 


farm. 


. Farm 


Labor 


< 






acres 


income 


income 


1 


New Hampshire, 1909 


General, with fruits, poultry, 
and dairying 


108** 
31.9 (Cult.) 


$ 654 


$337 


2 


U£ah Lake Valley 


Fruit and field crops 


46.6 

30.9 (Cult.) 


867 


417 


3 


Representative areas of 
Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa, 
1911 


Corn, oats, hay, wheat, and 
clover 


175 


1,488 


627 


4 


Chester County, Pennsyl- 


Hay, corn, wheat and some 


90 




789 




vania, 1916 


oats, and small fruits 


63.9 (Cult.) 






6 


Cut-over lands of Michigan, 


Hay, oats, corn, potatoes. 


108 


391 


49 




Wisconsin, and Minnesota, 


and dairying 


55.2 (Cult.) 








1916 










7 


Sumter County, Georgia 












White 


Mostly cotton 


158 Cult. 


1,542 


853 




Colored 


Mostly cotton 


95 Cult. 


682 


383 


8 


Central Kentucky 


Mostly live stock, and to- 
bacco 
Fruit, truck, live stock, and 


309 


2,419 


686 


9 


Provo Area, Utah 


64 


1,312 


728 






field crops 


45 (Cult.) 






10 


Monett, Mo. 


Grain, live stock, fruit, dairy- 


81 




370 


11 


Lower Rio Grande irrigated 


ing 
Truck gardening, stock rais- 


73 


1,471 






district of Texas, 1918 


ing and general 


59 (Cult.) 






12 


Brooks County, Georgia, 


Cotton, hog-raising, corn. 


331 


952 


232 




1918 


peanuts and oats 


145 (Cult.) 






13 


Anderson County, South 
Carolina, 1918 


Cotton, corn, oats, and hay 


135.8 
71.7 (Cult.) 


557 


-158 


14 


Irrigated valley of southern 
Arizona, 1918 


Alfalfa with some small 
fruits and chicken raising 


95 


2,370 


713 


15 


Ellis County, Texas, 1918 


Practically confined to cot- 
ton 
General with limited dairy- 


84 


1,294 




16 


Lenawee County, Michigan, 


104 


1,068 


481 




1918 


ing 








17 


Willamette Valley, Oregon, 


Oats, wheat, some legumin- 


202 


1,322 






1918 


ous crops, and potatoes 


141 (Cult.) 






18 


Washington County, Ohio, 


Sheep and cattle raising, also 


156 


506 


187 




1918 


corn, wheat, and hay 


43 (Cult.) 






19 


Southwestern Kentucky, 


Tobacco, wheat, and general 


300 


1,208 


356 




1918 


livestock 


225 (Cult.) 






20 


Northwestern Pennsylvania 


Live stock and crop 


101 


659 


285 


21 


Central New York, 1908 


General and dairying 


103 

72 (Cult.) 


757 


423 


23 


Johnson County, Missouri, 
1912 


Stock and grain, some hogs 


137.8 

115.7 (Cult.) 


1,218 


487 


26 


Gallatin Valley, Montana, 
1913-14 


Stock and grain 


225 

182 (Cult.) 


2,185 


555 


27 


Eastern Nebraska, 1912-14 


Stock and grain 


207.5 

158 (Cult.) 


1,717 


385 


28 


Southeastern Minnesota, 
1912 


Stock and grain 


135 

105 (Cult.) 


1,209 


319 


29 


Seven counties in Utah, 1914 


Forage, hay, grain, sugar 
beets, stock 


105.7 
54.1 (Cult.) 


1,135 


541 


30 


Monmouth County, New 


Potatoes, corn, hay, and 


98:3 


1,801 


917 




Jersey, 1914 


wheat 


73 (Cult.) 







* The numbers in this column refer to the prefixed numbers in the list of Farm Management Surveys 
(p. 326) where a description of the conditions surrounding the collection of data can be found. 

••Cultivated area. 

(o) Farm income is income after deducting expenses from receipts. 

(b) Labor income is the amount of money that the farmer has left after paying all business expenses 
of the farm, and deducting both the going rate of interest on the money invested in the farm business 
and the value of unpaid family labor other than operator's. 

Findings Concerning Farm Profits from Farm Management Surveys. 
While average incomes as reported from the surveys are only of general 



262 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



interest in comparison with the individual's own problem, they at least 
are a means of indicating something of what may be expected from the 
farming business. To one who has never had an opportunity to study 
closely the possibilities of income from farming, the rather low rate of 
returns will be informing. It should be remembered, however, that these 
are average returns for groups of farms. Some of the operators received 
greater returns than is shown here. On the other hand some of the 
returns were not so great. The amount of returns is influenced by such 
various factors as size of farm, amount of capital, kind of business, acces- 
sibility of market, experience, training, and capacity of operator, quality 
of soil, labor supply. 

If one will study these figures with a realization that they are indica- 
tive of without necessarily limiting the entire field, they will be found 
valuable for purposes of comparison and to show something of the situa- 
tion in various sections of the United States at the time when the surveys 
were made. 

Figures have been averaged to include both tenants and owners unless 
otherwise stated. 

Incomes as Tenant or Owner. — Several farm management surveys 
present their data in a way to permit a comparison of labor incomes ob- 
tained by groups of owners and of tenants. 

The key number refers to the survey, brief description of which is to 
be found in the chapter on "Farm Management Surveys." 





Table 85.— 


LiABOR Incomes, Tenant and Owner 








Farms operated by 


Farms operated by 








tenants 




owners 




Key 


State whence data 
























No. 


were obtained 


Average 

total 
acreage 


Average 

tilled 
acreage 


Labor 
income 


Average 

total 
acreage 


Average 

tilled 
acreage 


Labor 
income 


3 


Indiana, Illinois, and 
















Iowa 


172 




$ 870 


178 




$408 


4 


Pennsylvania 


106 


75.0 


739 


90 


63.9 


548 


7 


Georgia 




85.0 


547 




158.0 


853 


9 


Utah 


89 
126 


79.0 


1,012 
1,377 


65 
95 


45.0 


728 


14 


Arizona 


713 


16 


Michigan 


102 




651 


104 




481 


21 


New York 


127 
134 


87.0 
112.6 


379 
501 


103 
136 


72.0 
114.0 


423 


23 


Missouri 


314 


26 


Montana 


275 


203.0 


605 


255 


182.0 


474 


27 


Nebraska 


200 


158.0 


921 


214 


149.0 


203 


28 


Minnesota . 


151 


116.0 


474 


135 


105.0 


255 


30 


New Jersev 


165 


78.0 


768 


106 


66.0 


491 









FARM PROFITS 



263 



Averaging the twelve surveys -represented in the table, the labor 
income amount to: 

For owners $491 

For tenant 737 

In noting this comparison it should be borne in mind that these 
figures are for labor income and not for total farm income. Each group 
has the use of interest on its investment (usually at 5 per cent) and the 
value of unpaid family labor. Interest in the case of owners amounts 
to a figure considerably in excess of the tenant interest sums, as can be 
seen by referring to the table of relative capital invested by tenants when 
compared with owner's invested capital. (Page 261.) 

Sums Available, per Acre, above Operating Expenses, 34 California 
Crops, 1915 and 1919 Data. — The sum above operating costs, which under 

Table 86. — Sum Available above Operating Expense — California Crops 



Crop 



Usual yields 



Yield 



1915 1919 



Good yields 



Yield 



Alfalfa 

Almond 

Apple 

Apricot 

Asparagus 

Barley 

Beans 

Cabbage 

Cherry 

Corn, Indian. . . 
Cotton, medium 

Fig 

Grape (raisin). . 
Grape (table) . . . 
Hay (grain) .... 

Hops 

Lemon 

Oats 

Olive 

Onion 

Orange 

Peach 

Pear 

Pea, dry 

Plum 

Potato 

Prune 

Rice 

Sorghum (grain) 

Sugar beet 

Sweet potato. . . 

Tomato 

Walnut 

Wheat 



5 
700 
150 

4 

000 

200 

000 

10 

2 
000 
400 

2 

1 

4 

1 
400 
150 
900 

m 

7H 
125 

6 

5 
800 

SH 

3 

2 

500 

200 

10 

3 

10 

000 

000 



tons 

lb. 

packed bx. 

tons 

lb. 

lb. 

lb. 

tons 

tons 

lb. 

lb. 

tons 

ton dry 

tons 

ton 

lb. 

packed bx. 

lb. 

ton 

tons 

packed bx. 

tons 

tons 

lb. 

tons 

tons 

tons 

lb. 

lb. 

tons 

tons 

tons 

lb. 

lb. 



$ 11 


$ 37 


46 


96 


15 


143 


36 


52 


85 


64 


4 


17 


25 


24 


47 


80 


102 


148 


(a) 


(a) 


118 


145 


112 


435 


24 


125 


19 


91 


4 




136 


696 


111 


263 


5 


9 


49 


76 


14 


98 


41 


190 


50 


82 


69 


199 


63 


99 


(a) 


(a) 


(a) 


52 


79 


143 


5 


20 


(o) 


13 


29 


59 


27 


62 


49 


111 


41 


75 


4 


6 



1,200 

400 

8 

5,000 

2,000 

1,500 

15 

4 

2,000 

750 

2J^S 

1>! 

7 

2 

2,000 

300 

1,500 

2 

15 

250 

8 

10 

1,200 

6 

3 

3,500 

2,500 

15 

5 

20 

1,500 

700 



tons 

lb. 

packed bx. 

tons 

lb. 

lb. 

lb. 

tons 

tons 

lb. 

lb. 

tons 

ton dry 

tons 

tons 

lb. 

packed bx. 

lb. 

tons 

tons 

packed bx. 

tons 

tons 

lb. 

tons 

tons 

tons 

lb. 

lb. 

tons 

tons 

tons 

lb. 

lb. 



$ 15 

84 

90 

256 

115 

10 

41 

104 

230 

12 

240 

145 

46 

50 

12 

212 

(a) 

13 

69 

244 

114 

266 

232 

83 

4 

34 

341 

65 

14 

74 

89 

63 

215 

13 



$ 54 
172 
375 
471 

93 

33 

44 
171 
336 

11 
294 
549 
210 
187 
7 
1,015 
132 

28 
106 
620 
363 
384 
569 
124 

48 
173 
548 
111 

46 
137 
179 
150 
342 

18 



(a) Receipts less than expenses. 



264 FARM MANAGEMENT 

ordinary producing conditions would foe available to meet interest, depre- 
ciation, profit, risk, and other charges aside from necessary outlay for 
growing the crop, was found to be for 34 California crops, as shown here. 
The figures are for both usual (ordinary) and good (occasional but not 
exceptional) yields, under conditions of the years 1915 and 1919, the for- 
mer fairly representing pre-war, the latter of post-war periods. 

Cost data covering these same crops are given in the chapter on 
''Cost of Production." 

The gross returns of the 34 crops listed above averaged $107 per acre 
in 1915 and $230 per acre in 1919. The costs of production averaged 
$66 in 1915 and $110 in 1919. The sum, therefore, available above 
operating expense, climbed from $41 in 1915 to $120 in 1919. In other 
words the profits, when measured as sums above operating expense, about 
tripled, while expense of production did not quite double. In percentages, 
based on usual prices, the increase in 1919 over 1915 ranged from minus 
10 per cent to 328 per cent, with a general average increase in returns to 
farmers of 115 per cent. 

What the Table Shows. — A study of the table shows (a) the influence 
of the high prices of 1919, (b) the influence upon income of good produc- 
ing land compared with the income possibilities of average land, (c) 
the variation of different crops in their income producing possibilities, 
(d) the amount of acreage to provide a given farm, — or net income from 
selected crops, (e) the necessity of knowing what a given piece of land 
is capable of doing in advance of purchasing. 

Examples of Large Returns from Farming. — The average labor in- 
come as indicated in the findings of farm surveys may be so discouraging 
to some that a further analysis is desirable. In each group there are 
operators who are making far greater incomes than the average shown. 
Examples of these are given : 

(Numbers refer to farm management surveys — see pages 326 to 334.) 

No. 4. — (o) An intensive dairy farm of 80 acres in Chester County, Pennsylvania, 
under very efficient management gave a labor income of more than $2,000. 

(6) A labor income of $3,000 was obtained from a 120-acre farm in the same county. 
This was also a dairy farm but quite diversified in character, having several kinds 
of important crops. 

(c) The largest labor income in this group was $3,700 on a farm of about 175 acres. 

No. 5. — Seven of the more successful grain and stock farms of the muck land of 
northern Indiana and southern Michigan made labor incomes averaging $1,994. 

No. 7. — (a) One diversified farm of 268 crop acres in Sumter County in central 
Georgia operated with the help of three wage hands and one cropper family — $600 
extra labor — returned a labor income of $4,468. 

(b) A typical cotton farm of 243 crop acres in the bluegrass region of Kentucky, as 
represented by Mason, Scott, and Madison Counties, operated with the help of six 
wage hands and two cropper families and $800 extra labor, gave a labor income of 
$4,344. 

No. 10. — An exceptional, highly specialized fruit farm near Monett, Missouri, gave 
a labor income of approximately $2,500. 



FARM PROFITS 



265 



No. 14. — One cotton and hog farm in an irrigated district in southern Arizona 
made a labor income of $4,235. However, this farmer is engaged in the business of 
buying hogs, keeping them a short time on his farm and then selhng them. 

The average labor income of nine dairy farms in the same region was $2,567 and on 
seventeen live stock farms the average labor income was $.3,318. 

No. 19. — A 160-acre diversified farm in southwestern Kentucky gave a labor in- 
come of $2,766, and a 1,091-acre diversified farm yielded a labor income of $4,206. 
These farms were selected as examples of good farm organization in the area studied. 

No. 21. — (a) About one farmer in every one hundred in the townships of Ithaca, 
Dryden, Danby, and Lansing, in Tomkins County, Central New York, made a labor 
income of over $2,000. 

(6) A well-organized diversified dairy and field crop farm in this section gave a labor 
income of $2,750 one year and $3,551 the next year. 

(c) Another farm of similar organization gave a labor income of $2,436. 

(d) A milk, hay, and potato farm had a labor income of $2,920. 

(e) A diversified farm gave $2,802 labor income. 

(/) Other farms showed a labor income of $2,416, $6,217 (father and son), $2,107, 
$2,305, .$3,462, $3,668. 

No. 24. — Records of farms in various counties in different parts of New York 
State showed the labor income of a dairy farm to be $2,239, and of a dairy and field 
crops farm $2,859 in one instance and $3,270 in another case. 

No. 26. — (a) The best paying farm in Gallatin Valley, Montana, made a labor in- 
come of $4,413. 

(b) Three other farms in the survey made labor incomes of over .$2,000, $3,888, 
$2,770, $2,216, respectively. These were all stock and crop farms, averaging about 
31 per cent of their receipts from stock. 

No. 28. — A 200-acre farm in Rice County, southeastern Minnesota, having as its 
major sources of income cattle, dairy products, swine, and grain, yielded a labor in- 
come of $2,484. 

No. 30. — A well managed farm in Monmouth County, New Jersey, gave a labor 
income of $2,499, while another farm with larger capital gave a labor income of $1,221, 
other factors than capital being nearly equal. 

California Examples of Farm Profits. — Examples of western farm 
profits from selected ranches are given below. Note that we are now con- 
cerned with individual cases rather than with group averages, should 
comparison be made of these figures with the survey data given above. 



Table 87. — California Examples op Farm Profits — (Selected Cases) 



Business 



Acres 


Invest- 
ment 


Operat- 
ing 
costs 


Interest 


Depre- 
ciation 


Total 


Re- 
ceipts 


90 


$ 79,200 


$7,200 


$4,752 


$ 495 


$12,447 


$26,000 


38 


85,025 


4,066 


5,100 


535 


9,701 


17,626 


258 


160,170 


9,030 


9,610 


1,669 


20,309 


25,355 


500 


170,315 








38,880 


44,232 


39 


45,500 


2,798 


2,730 


490 


6,185 


7,742 


2 


2,165 


1,507 


130 


156 


1,793 


2,605 


2 


1,520 


2,631 


91 


198 


2,920 


3,837 


10 


12,400 


610 


744 


80 


1,434 


2,400 


7.5 


9,800 


510 


588 


230 


1,328 


2,940 



Labor 
income 



Apples and pears 

Pears 

100-cow dairy and 

field crops 

400-cow dairy 

30-oow dairy 

800 fowls 

1,200 fowls 

Prunes 

Prunes and apricots. . 



$11,553 
7,925 

5,046 

5,352 

1,557 

812 

917 

966 

1,612 



266 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Value of Perquisites. — Labor incomes represent only the suna of 
money available to reimburse the operator for his labor. In actual 
farming there is available for use of the family in addition to this sum, 
interest on all moneys invested by the operator, and fair valuation for 
use of the house, home grown food products, fuel, and other perquisites. 

Determined Value of Perquisites. Georgia. — From a study of farm- 
ing made in 1914 in Sumter County, Georgia, ^^ reports from 50 farms gave 
an average annual value for the food, fuel, and house of $519.63 per family 
of five members. Of this sum $363.03 was for food products and repre- 
sented 78.3 per cent of the total food expense of the family. Fuel 
amounted to $51.60; use of house $92.00. 

A study also made the same year, in Brooks County, Georgia,^^ gave 
a range of values of from $267 to $612 of farm grown food supplies, $33 
to $306 value of house, or a general average for white operators of $754, 
including $15 for wood. 

Arizona. — The average contribution of the farm to the living of the 
family and board of hired labor, a total average of four adults, on 476 
irrigated farms in southern Arizona, from a study made in 1913-14-15, 
was $270 for farm produced eggs, dairy products, meat, fruits, and 
vegetables, and $94 as the annual rental value of the dwelling for an 
average 80-acre irrigated farm.^^ 

Ohio. — Additional income furnished by the farm is reported from a 
six-year study in Washington County, Ohio, covering 1912 to 1916 
inclusive, as amounting to $325, or 90 per cent of the needs of an average 
family of four. The $325 is divided into food $215, dwelling $87, and 
fuel $23. «^ 

Kentucky. — In southwestern Kentucky the estimated value of family 
living and house furnished by the farm is figured at $500 for the year 1915 
and covering studies of 342 farms. ®^ 

Missouri. — A study conducted in Johnson County, Missouri, in 1912, 
and covering 669 farms, shows that a little more than one-third of the 
owner's actual income came from the products which the farm furnished 
him, as vegetables, fruit, poultry, dairy products, and meat, valued at 
$163, plus a house to live in.^^ 

Nebraska. — Study of forty farms during 1915 in eastern Nebraska 
resulted in an average valuation of $477 for house, animal products, 
vegetables, and fruits furnished by the farm." 

Utah. — The conclusions from a study of 309 irrigated farms of Utah, 
made during 1914, give a value of $600 for farm products consumed by the 
average family. ^^ 

Family Needs as Found in Georgia. — One hundred six farms in 
Brooks County, Georgia, produced, on an average, family food to the 
extent shown in the following table :^^ 



FARM PROFITS 



267 



Table 88. — Family Food Purchased and Produced on the Farm; 

Amounts and Values per Family and per Person (106 Farms, 

Brooks County, Georgia) 



Kinds of food 



Unit 



Per family 



Quantity 



Valt 



Per person (a) 



Quantity 



Value 



Purchased: 

Flour 

Sugar 

Coffee, tea, cocoa, chocolate, postum 

Rice 

Meat, lard, cheese, fish 

All other food 



Total food purchased 

Produced on farm: 

Pork 

Lard 

Dairy products (b) 

Poultry 

Eggs 

Other live-stock products (c) 

Corn (meal and hominy) (d) 

Cane sirup 

Sugar cane 

Peanuts 

Pecans 

Sweet potatoes 

Irish potatoes 

Beans and peas (green in hulls) (e) . 
Turnips, rutabagas, and collards . . . 

Watermelons 

Tomatoes 

Cabbage 

Green corn 

Okra 

Onions 

Squash and pumpkins 

Cucumbers 

Beets 

Other vegetables 

Grapes (scuppernong) 

Peaches 

Figs 

Pears 

Oranges and grape fruit 

Apples and vinegar 



Total food produced. 



Pounds 
Pounds 
Pounds 
Pounds 
Pounds 



Pounds 
Pounds 
Gallons 
Number 
Dozens 



Bushels 

Gallons 

Stalks 

Bushels 

Pounds 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Number 

Bushels 

Heads 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 

Bushels 



810.0 
191.0 



55.0 



770.0 
185.0 
471.0 
69.0 
111.0 



27.4 

38.6 

524.0 

0.86 
40.9 
52.2 

8.9 
15.2 



128.0 
4.4 
83.0 
3.8 
2.6 
1,6 
2.0 
0.9 
0.8 



3.9 
1.9 
2.3 
2.1 



$ 30.34 

13.37 

7.33 

4.37 

2.60 

14.79 

$ 72.70 

108.40 

23.00 

118.50 

24.50 

21.90 

1.56 

27.40 

15.50 

8.02 

0.86 

7.38 

26.10 

8.86 

11.30 

6.80 

6.32 



0.88 
0.87 
0.83 



S453.29 



153.0 
36.0 



145.0 
35.0 
89.0 
13.0 
21.0 

5.2 
7.3 

99.0 
0.16 
7.7 
9.85 
1.68 
2.87 
6.80 

24.15 
0.83 

15.67 
0.72 
0.49 
0.30 
0.38 
0.17 
0.15 

0.74 
0.36 
0.43 
0.40 



5.73 
2.52 
1.38 
0.83 
0.49 
2.77 



$ 13.72 

20.47 
4.34 

22.36 
4.62 
4.13 
0.29 
5.17 
2.92 
1.51 
0.16 



0.86 
0.78 
0.72 
0.49 
0.34 
0.17 
0.16 
0.16 
0.19 
0.89 
0.71 
0.52 
0.40 
0.33 
0.25 



$85.52 



Note. — Values of food produced represent sale values on the farm. 

(a) Adult equivalent. (6) Milk, cream, and butter expressed as their equivalent in gallons of whole 
milk, (c) Honey, $1.52; goats and kids, (d) Includes some corn bread and hominy fed to hogs and 
chickens, (e) Lima beans and cowpeas. 



268 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Farm Contributions Toward Family Living as Found in Nebraska. — 

Nebraska found the farm contribution towards the family living to be:^^ 

Table 89. — Farm Contributions Toward Living — Nebraska 



Richardson County 


Tenant, 
12 farms 


Owner, 
28 farms 


Average, 
40 farms 


Area in acres 


216 

$988 
29 


169 

$2,154 

43 


183 


Value of house 


$1 804 


Life of house — years 


39 






Cost of house — year 


$105 
60 
12 

1 
28 
30 

1 
33 
41 


33 

3 

1 
16 
19 

4 
13 

3 


$ 201 
56 

8 

1 
21 
34 

1 
34 
41 

3 
27 

7 

7 
16 
20 

4 
25 

3 


$ 172 


Pork 


57 


Beef 

Mutton 


9 
1 


Poultry 


23 


Whole milk 


33 


Other milk 


1 


Cream 


34 


Butter 


41 


Honey 

Eggs 


2 
29 


Apples 


6 


Other fruit 


5 


Irish potatoes 

Other vegetables 


16 
20 


Wheat exchanged 


4 


Wood 

Cobs 


21 
3 


Total 


$405 


$ 509 


$ 477 



Living Costs in Minnesota. — On Minnesota farms, F. W. Peck^^ 
found the yearly cost of living for an average family of five, as determined 
by a study covering 1905-14, to be: 

Table 90. — Living Costs per Family and per Person — Minnesota 





Item 


Average, 


all farms 




Per family 


Per person 


Purchased food 


$196.64 

181.05 

234.65 

41.17 

55.42 

107.60 


$ 39.04 


Farm produce 

Labor 


35.94 
46 60 


Equipment 


8 17 


Fuel 


11 01 


Rent 


21 36 








Total 


$816.63 


$162 12 







FARM PROFITS 269 

Cash Spent Annually for Farm Living 

Item Avebaqe, all Farms 

Per family 

Purchased food $196. 64 

Fuel 49. 74 

Labor 22 . 12 

Total $268. 50 

Per month 22 . 37 

Per person 

Purchased food $ 39 . 04 

Fuel 10.51 

Labor 4 . 53 

Total $ 54 . 08 

Per month 4.51 

Family Living an Important Item. — Funk"^ found that "it is what the 
farm furnishes directly toward Hving expenses of his family which en- 
ables the farmer to get along, even though his crops are poor or the loss 
on his live stock eats up his profits. Food and shelter are the important 
requisites of life, and a good proportion of these necessaries are furnished 
by the farm in addition to the income derived from the sale of farm prod- 
ucts. The labor income is therefore, not the limiting factor in deter- 
mining how much a farmer shall have to eat, but it is of the wage earner 
in the city." 

Value of Family Living in a Number of States. — Studies in 1913 and 
1914 were conducted by Funk''^ under widely varying conditions, since 
the quantity of farm products furnished to the household is affected by the 
weather, the type of farming, and the length of the growing season. 

Description of Areas Studied in 1913. — Data were collected in 10 
different areas in the year 1913. The three cotton-growing areas visited 
were in Gaston County, North Carolina; Troup and Meriwether Counties, 
Georgia; and McLennan County, Texas. The types of agriculture in the 
North Carolina and Georgia areas are fairly similar, cotton and corn 
being the main crops. In the Texas area, ho»vever, a definite rotation 
of corn, oats, and cotton is followed. Farming is here done more exten- 
sively. The annual rainfall is considerably less than in the other two 
cotton-growing areas visited. Cloud County 'and Montgomery County, 
both important corn-growing districts, were selected for the work in the 
States of Kansas and Iowa, respectively. The chief crops grown in the 
Kansas area are corn, wheat, and alfalfa, though some farmers raise only 
corn and alfalfa. A series of dry years had discouraged the growing of 
all but a few vegetables. In the Iowa area the agriculture is more 
diversified, considerable oats and wheat being grown. Hog raising is 
an important industry in both these sections. The Jefferson County, 



270 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Wisconsin, area is wholly a dairy region. The money crops raised are 
oats and barley. Considerable pure-bred Holstein and Guernsey live 
stock is raised here. General farming is the prevailing type in Champaign 
County, Ohio, and in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Corn, oats, wheat, 
and hay are the principal crops, with small dairies on many of the farms. 
In Otsego County, New York, and in Lamoille County, Vermont, dairying 
is the chief enterprise. The growing seasons here are appreciably shorter 
than in any of the other areas. 

Result of 1913 Studies. — These 1913 studies resulted in findings as 
shown in the following table. The average values per family of food, 
fuel, and use of house are shown by States. 



Table 91. — Average Annual Value of Food, Fuel, and use of a Dwelling 

Furnished by the Home Farm to 483 Families in 10 Representative 

Agricultural Districts Studied 1913"' 





Num- 
ber 
of 

fami- 
lies 


Per- 
sons 
in 
family 


Food 


F 


uel 


House rent 


Total 


State 


Per 

family 


Per 
person 


Per 
family 


Per 
person 


Per 

family 


Per 

person 


Per 

family 


Per 

person 


North Carolina. 

Georgia 

Texas 


55 
50 
44 
46 
51 
46 
44 
43 
55 
49 


4.5 
5.4 
5.3 
4.5 
4.4 
4.2 
4.1 
5.2 
4.0 
4.8 


$330.65 
376.03 
275.62 
292.48 
297.28 
209.44 
248.28 
201.69 
189.60 
192.43 


$73.47 
69.65 
52.00 
65.00 
70.80 
47.60 
60.57 
38.80 
47.40 
40.10 


$41.87 
51.60 
4.13 
17.97 
30.20 
35.80 
30.50 
17.91 
53.80 
63.40 


$ 9.30 
9.56 
0.78 
4.00 
7.20 
8.14 
7.44 
3.44 
13.45 
13.21 


$ 56.00 
92.00 
83.00 
116.00 
158.00 
130.00 
172 . 00 
163.00 
188 . 00 
93.00 


$12.45 
17.04 
15.66 
25.80 
37.62 
29.54 
42.00 
31.34 
47.00 
19.38 


$428 . 52 
519.63 
362.75 
426.45 
485.48 
375.24 
450.78 
382 . 60 
431.40 
348.83 


$ 95.22 
96.25 
68.44 


Kansas 


94.80 
115.62 


Wisconsin 

Ohio 


85.28 
110.01 


Pennsylvania. . . 

New York 

Vermont 


73.58 

107.85 

72.69 


Total or aver- 


483 


4.6 


$261.35 


$56.51 


$34.72 


$7.65 


$125.10 


S27.78 


$421.17 


$91.97 







The average total cost per family was $595.08, of which $421.17 
was furnished by the farm and $173.91 purchased. 

The average annual value of food, fuel, oil, and shelter per person for 
the families visited was $129.74, of which $91.97 was furnished directly 
by the farm and $37.77 purchased. 

The average cost of the food consumed per person was $89.23. Of 
this food 63 per cent was furnished by the farm. The total food prod- 
ucts consumed annually were distributed as follows: groceries, 24.8 
per cent; animal products, 57.3 per cent; fruits, 6.3 per cent; vegetables, 
11.6 per cent. Three-fourths of the food consumed belonged to the 
general class of farm-furnished products, although only 63 per cent of the 
food used was actually taken directly from the farm. 

The average annual value of the use of the farmhouse was found to 
be $125 per family. The value of the dwelling is generally considered 



FARM PROFITS 



271 



a part of the value of the farm and is thus furnished free for the use 
of the farm family. The importance of this is fully appreciated by the 
family in the town or city paying house rent. 

The house labor was performed chiefly by members of the family, 
only 4 per cent being hired. The average value of this labor was $203 
per family. 

Description of Areas Studied in 1914. — In 1914 more specialized 
sections in New Jersey, Maine, North Dakota, and California were 
visited. The New Jersey area in Gloucester County was distinctly one 
of market gardening and trucking. Much of the produce was hauled by 
the farmer to Philadelphia, a distance of about 10 miles, affording a good 
opportunity to buy household supplies. Vegetables and fruits were 
raised in great variety. The Maine areas in Androscoggin and Oxford 
Counties were dairy and fruit regions. Apples and dairy products were 
the important farm sales. Considerable sweet corn was also grown for 
canning purposes. In North Dakota, Cass County was visited. Grain 
growing is the chief industry there. The farms are large and the distance 
to market relatively great. Practically no fruit is raised, and the variety 
of vegetables grown for home use is small. The region studied in Santa 
Clara County, Cal., is an irrigated fruit area. The farms are small and 
most of the area is devoted to frait. The most generally grown fruits are 
prunes, apricots, and peaches. On many of the small farms all the land 
is devoted to fruit trees, no land being set aside for family garden. 

Results 0/1914 Studies. ^The following table presents the findings for 
1914: 

Table 92. — Average Annual Value of Food, Fuel, and Use of a Dwelling 
Furnished by the Home Farm (950 Families) — Studied 1914 



Location of regions in 

which study was made 

(county and state) 



Food 



Fuel 



House rent 



Per 

family 



Per 
person 



Per 
family 



Per 

person 



Per 
family 



Per 
person 



Total 



Per 
family 



Per 

person 



Oxford, Me 

Lamoille, Vt 

Otsego, N. Y 

Bucks, Pa 

Gloucester, N. J 

Gaston, N. C 

Troup, Ga 

McLennan, Tex 

Champaign, Ohio 

Jefferson, Wis 

Montgomery, Iowa. . . 

Cloud, Kan 

Cass, N. D 

Santa Clara, Cal 

Average, all families 



$200.00 
192.43 
189 . 60 
201 . 69 
266.16 
330 . 65 
376.03 
275.62 
248 . 28 
209 . 44 
297 . 28 
292 . 48 
384 . 58 
175.62 



$260.00 



$44.49 
40.10 
47.40 
38.80 
56.63 
73.47 
69.65 
52.00 
60.57 
47.60 
70.80 
65.00 
62.03 
35.84 



$5^4 . 60 



$43.42 
63.40 
53.80 
17.91 
15.04 
41.87 
51.60 
4.13 
30.50 
35.80 
30.20 
17.97 
18.04 
16.51 



$ 9.65 
13.21 
13.45 
3.44 
3.20 
9.30 
9.56 
0.78 
7.44 
8.14 
7.20 
4.00 
2.91 
3.37 



$31.44 



$6.83 



$111.00 

93.00 

188.00 

163.00 

164.00 

56.00 

92.00 

83.00 

172.00 

130.00 

158.00 

116.00 

175.00 

149.00 



$24 . 63 
19.38 
47.00 
31.34 
34.84 
12.45 
17.04 
15.66 
42.00 
29.54 
37.62 
25.80 
28.21 
30.40 



$132.00 



$28 . 28 



$354 . 62 
348.83 
431.40 
382 . 60 
445.20 
428 . 52 
519.63 
362.75 
450.78 
375.24 
485.48 
426.45 
577 . 62 
341.13 



$ 78.77 
72.69 

107.85 
73.58 
94.67 
95.22 
96.25 
68.44 

110.01 
85.28 

115.62 
94.80 
93.15 
69.61 



$423 . 58 



).71 



272 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Based on an average family of 4.8 persons the findings were to the 
effect that: 



Annual value of food, fuel, and use of house 

Furnished by farm $424 (66 per cent) 
Bought 218 (34 per cent) 



Average per family 
Annual value of food 



Average per family $448 



Annual value of fuel 



Animal products, 58 per cent 
Groceries 25 per cent I From farm 58 per cent 

Vegetables 11 per cent [ Bought 42 per cent 

Fruits 6 per cent 



Wood (9.4 cords), $36.30 1 From farm, 54 per cent 
Average per family $62 -{Coal (2.6 tons), 17.85 [ Bought, 46 per cent 

Oil (55 gal.), 6.33 i 

Annual use of house — Value 

Average per family, $132 

Annual value of housework 

A r -1 ffl-fioo ( Furnished bv family, $217 (95 per cent) 

Average per family $288 „. , - ■,■,) r /■. 

[Hired 11 ( 5 per cent) 

It was found that the average annual value of meats (other than poul- 
try) consumed per family was $107.25; of poultry products,$55.40; and of 
dairy products $98.36. (The quantity of dairy products consumed was 
equivalent to 2,640 qt. of milk.) 

Meats constitute the most important group of foods. As use increases 
in relation to other foods, the total food value consumed per family 
increases. Those families having a relatively greater consumption of 
either groceries, vegetable, or dairy products use relatively less meats, and 
their total consumption of food is less in value. 

Families living on their own farms reported higher consumption of 
food and a larger proportion of food derived directly from the farm than 
did those living on rented farms. 

The average quantity of fruit canned annually per family was 122 
quarts; of vegetables, 32 quarts. 

The cost of board (as of hired hands) in food, fuel, and housework 
was shown to be $129 per year. Thirty-one per cent of this represents 
cash outlay. 

Perquisites Important to Farmers. — From which it is logical to con- 
clude that the farmer's cost of living in actual cash expenditures is very 
materially reduced by what the farm furnishes in food products, fuel, and 
house rent; in fact, the income from this source adds as much to the real 
wealth of many farmers as does the net income from the sale of farm 
products. 

If it were not for those products contributed by the farm without any 
cash expenditure, a great many farmers would not have a comfortable 
living. Extensive investigations relative to the profits in farming indi- 
cate that the average labor income of the farmer probably differs little 



FARM PROFITS 273 

from ordinary farm wages, but in addition to this he has the products 
contributed by the farm. 

Value of Perquisites to Individuals. — How far the farm business can 
go in providing additional income in the way of housing, vegetables, eggs, 
fruits, poultry, etc., etc., towards meeting living costs, depends on the type 
of farming, the living standards of the family, the size of the family, the 
ages of the individual members, and the equipment of the farm. The 
value of house rent, for instance, depends on the character of the dwelling 
on the place. Some families will confine consumption to the small, 
gnarled fruit, eggs from stolen nests, cull vegetables, aged fowls, and will 
save the best produce for market. The environment under which the 
family was reared largely determines its standard of living, and will vary 
with the individuals comprising the family. One family will obtain 
several hundred dollars from its farm by-products and minor industries, 
sufficient to meet perhaps 50 per cent of its wants; another family is able 
to obtain but 20 or 25 per cent of its needs. This is especially true in 
comparing diversified with specialized enterprises. The former tend to 
provide a greater variety for longer periods, and thus to increase the 
products available for home consumption. 

Living Needs and Standards of Families Vary. — Factors affecting 
the amount of income obtainable and the varying needs of the operators 
may be realized when an attempt is made to compare: 

(a) The production of stuff for home consumption on a Florida citrus 
grove with that on a Pennsylvania or New York general farm, or the 
value of home goods on a farm specializing in poultry products with the 
diverse enterprises of the corn belt. 

(6) The needs of a single man just starting out, with that of a family of 
five, the children of which are all under fifteen, or either of these with a 
family of six including four grown sons, or a family composed largely of 
daughters. 

(c) A family frugally raised and used to a simple standard of living 
with the city reared family used to specially prepared foods. 

(d) The requirements of different races e.g., the Latin, the Scandina- 
vian, the Slav, the Chinese, the Filipino, the Japanese, the Negro. 

(e) The log cabin, the simple family cottage, the more pretentious 
farm house, and the elegant mansion of the country estate. 

The determination of what circumstances of the farm income can be ob- 
tained from given proposition must be individually made from stand- 
points of both the character of the farm business and the needs of the 
family. 

The Unearned Increment. — Although direct farm profits may 
appear to be surprisingly small to those heretofore not fully acquainted 
with the facts, the indirect profits should not be ignored. Much of 
the big profits in farming is the outcome of increasing land values. 

18 



274 FARM MANAGEMENT 

The rapid settling of new communities, the planting out of orchards, the 
reaching out of city boundaries, the building of highways, the improve- 
ment of the automobile, the extension of railroad and street car systems, 
have all tended to increase the demands for land. Future possibilities 
of profits from this source can not be predicted. The "unearned incre- 
ment," as these profits are termed, is subject to many influences. Study 
of the trend of agricultural development is well worthy of consideration, 
as ability to forecast coming changes will influence plans and tend to 
increase profits. While increased profits due to rising land values are of 
special value to the land owner, such information will help tenants, and 
managers working on salary, especially if operating under long-term 
contracts. 

In planting additional orchards where many new plantings have been 
already set out, study is necessary of prospective markets and their 
ability to absorb the increased output. Subdivisions to be developed 
for farms warrant study on the part of buyers if costs of putting on 
markets are to be met. Buying a farm for its probable increasing land 
values calls for sagacious judgment, especially if based on prospects 
of railroad extension, town development, or development of new agri- 
cultural enterprises such as creamery, cannery, or sugar factory. 



CHAPTER XIII 
FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 

Farm management surveys, as pointed out in another chapter, are 
conducted for the scientific gathering of facts for analysis and deduction. 
These surveys deal with averages, and tend to eliminate the unusual, 
spectacular or astonishing things. 

For when the conditions affecting the agriculture of a region have 
remained stable for a considerable period, local agricultural practice 
tends to become approximately what it should be for best results; it 
tends towards a level or uniform character. Best final results and best 
immediate results, however, may differ widely ; the latter may be in a prac- 
tice very unfavorable to maintenance of soil fertility, as, for example, the 
year-in and year-out western grain farming of a generation ago. 

But when conditions change, even slightly — if the change is permanent 
— local farm practice tends to alter, and ultimately adapts itself to the 
new conditions. 

Thus studies conducted in a given locality aim to show what actual 
farmers have found most satisfactory to them as means of obtaining 
profits. Such studies are indicative, but at the same time the low labor 
income so often met is sufficient evidence of the need for even greater 
endeavor to organize farming properly in the interest of increased returns. 

Factors Affecting Profits. — The findings of investigations are to the 
effect that certain well defined influences largely affect farm incomes. 
Summed up the factors of outstanding interest are : 

1. The type of business. 

2. The size of business as: 

(a) Area of land, or as 

(6) Amount of working capital, or as 

(c) Amount of productive labor, 

3. The quality of the business whether appearing in: 

(a) Crop yields, or in 
(6) Income per animal. 
In studying the data one may well bear in mind that the specialized 
farm in its pure form is not, to any significant extent, included in the data 
presented, since these studies were conducted for the most part in com- 
munities of diversified agriculture. Perhaps for the single-industry farm 
there is a place not yet fully recognized. 

Below are presented a number of extracts from farm management 
surveys. 

275 



276 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



The Type of Farming as Affecting Profits. — The type of farming 
followed in any given case must be suited to soil, climatic, and labor 
conditions; to market facilities; to individual capacities; and to the 
business conditions applicable to individual farms. 

With a given type of farming, under given conditions, there is a certain 
way of dividing the acreage among the several enterprises which is more 
profitable than any other way; that is, there is a most profitable acreage 
for each crop. Similarly, there is a most profitable proportion of income 
from each source. If the acreage of any crop or the proportion of income 
from any enterprise, be greater or less than this optimum, the profits of 
the farm as a whole are lowered proportionately. 

Examples of Effect on Profits of Type of Business. — An indication of 
the influence of kind of farming upon profits is shown in a California 
study of farms grouped according to their type of farming. 



Table 93. — Effect of Type of Business upon Profits — California 



Business 



No. 


Average 






size of 


Net 


records 








farm, 


income 


in group 


acre 




23 


140 


$1,826 


38 


81 


2,430 


6 


474 


3,485 


21 


21 


2,211 



Labor income 



Range 



Average 



Field crops 

Fruit 

Live stock. 
Poultry. . . . 



-2,469 to 2,305 

-997 to 4,526 

801 to 2,941 

62 to 4,216 



678 
1,477 
1,871 
1,717 



The segregation of the fruit farms shown in the above table, according 
to the kind of fruit raised, is also indicative. 



Table 94. — ^Effect of Different Types of Fruit Growing upon Profits- 
California 



Kind of fruit 



No. records 



Average 
acreage 
per farm Per farm 



Labor income 



Per acre 



Apples 

Wine grapes 

Prunes 

Pears 



12 

8 
11 
10 



18 
17 
13 
10 



$1,352 
1,033 
1,929 
2,522 



5112.66 
129.12 
175.36 
252.20 



FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 



277 



Size of Business as Affecting Profits 

The size of business may be measured as (a) area, (6) amount of 
working capital, (c) amount of productive labor. 

In comparing farms with respect to size or volume of business, 
some of the more important factors to be considered are size of farm, 
acres in crops, the amount of live stock carried, the amount of capital 
invested, and amount of labor required in operating the farm. On farms 
where one enterprise predominates, such as a specialized cotton, fruit, 
or dairy farm, the best measure of size of business may be the acres in 
cotton, acres in fruit, or number of cows. The amount of labor required 
in operating the farm may be used to good advantage in comparing 
farms of different types. Twenty acres of truck crops may, under 
suitable conditions, equal 200 acres of grain, hay, and general live stock 
both as to labor required and income received. 

Effect of Size of Farm Area upon Income. — Examples of the effect 
of size of business measured as area are numerous in the farm manage- 
ment surveys. 



Pennsylvania. 

Table 95. — Effect of Area of Farm upon Labor Income (378 Farms Operated 
BY Owners in Chester County, Pennsylvania) ^ 



Size of farms, in acres 


Number 
of farms 


Average 
size, 
acres 


Average 

labor 

income 


Per cent of 

farms with 

labor income 

$1,000 or more 


13 to 40 


54 
61 
60 
68 
52 
61 
22 


28 

52 

73 

93 

110 

136 

203 


$ 240 

. 550 

730 

848 

937 

1,094 

1,575 


6 


41 to 60 


10 


61 to 80 


25 


81 to 100 


34 


101 to 120 


46 


121 to 160 


46 


161 to 393 


68 






Average 


378 


90 


789 


30 







278 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Corn Belt. 

Table 96. — Effect of Area of P'arm upon Income (273 Farms Operated 
BY Owners in Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa)^! 





Farms 


Distribution per acre 


Money 

available 

for farmer's 

living if free 

of debt 


Area, acres 


Number 


Average 
size, 
acres 


Receipts 


Expenses 


Interest 


40 and less 


32 
51 
48 
44 
31 
36 
19 
12 


37.4 
72.9 
106.9 
149.4 
179.1 
239.8 
321.8 
623.8 


$18.10 
17.09 
16.22 
15.62 
18.04 
18.12 
13.89 
16.19 


$6.98 
5.46 
6.88 
5.80 
7.12 
6.70 
5.07 
6.28 


$9.03 

8.45 
8.22 
8.30 
8.58 
8.42 
8.32 
7.90 


$ 416 


41 to 80 

81 to 120 

121 to 160 

161 to 200 

201 to 280 

281 to 400 

401 to 1,250 


848 
998 
1,467 
1,956 
2,738 
2,838 
6,182 


Total or average. . . 


273 


178.3 


$17.25 


$6.38 


$8.58 


$1,938 



Georgia. 

Table 97. — Effect of Area of Farm upon Capital, Receipts, Expenses, and 
Income (160 Farms Operated by White Owners, Sumter County, 

Georgia) 18 



Tilled acres per farm 


Number 

of 

farms 


Farm 
income 


Labor 
income 


50 and less 


25 
41 
40 


$ 288 

626 

1,147 


$ 138 


51 to 100 


307 


101 to 150 


636 






Total, 150 and less tilled 


106 


$ 743 


$ 391 






151 to 250 


31 
12 
11 


$2,184 
2,957 
5,886 


$1 374 


251 to 450 


1 411 


Over 450 


3 223 






Total, over 150 tilled 


54 


$3,110 


$1 759 






Grand total 


160 


$1,542 


$ 853 





FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 



279 



Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. 

Table 98. — Effect of Area of Farm upon Income (801 Farms, Cut-over Lands 
OF Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota)'" 



Tillable area per farm, acres 


Farms 

in 
group 


Tillable 
area, 
acres 


Size 

of 

farm, 

acres 


Farm 
income 


Labor 
income 


20 or less 


50 

246 

237 

151 

54 

43 

20 


15.5 
31.6 
50.2 
68.8 
88.9 
115.1 
179.5 


60 
77 
107 
124 
148 
169 
254 


•S 62 
194 
377 
437 
667 
1,016 
1,388 


$118 


20. 1 to 40 


56 


40 1 to 60 


47 


60 1 to 80 


52 


80.1 to 100 


195 


100.1 to 140 


463 


Over 140 


495 






Total and average of all 


801 


55.2 


108 


391 


49 







Arizona. 

Table 99. — Maximum and Minimum Farm Incomes from Farms of Different 
Areas, and the Percentage of Farms in Each Group Furnishing 
AN Income of $1,500 or More — Southern Arizona^i 



Size-group, acres 


Number 
of farms 


Average 
area, acres 


Maximum 

farm 

income 


Minimum 

farm 

income 


Percentage 
of farms in 
group fur- 
nishing in- 
comes of 
$1,500 or 
more 


to 19 


54 
45 
54 
84 
103 
75 
47 
39 
44 
50 
32 


11 

20 

30 

40 

62 

80 

101 

137 

160 

244 

530 


$ 2,621 

• 3,359 

3,876 

4,711 

5,492 

5,323 

4,692 

7,707 

9,062 

14,266 

24,215 


$ 151 

97 

69 

25 

347 

88 

723 

834 

860 

385 

3,386 


5.6 


20 


15.6 


21 to 39 


29.6 


40 


27.4 


41 to 79 


62.1 


80 


74.7 


81 to 119 


80.9 


120 to 159 


92.3 


160 


90.9 


161 to 320 


98.0 


Over 320 


100.0 







280 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Michigan. 



Table 100. — Effect of Area of Farm upon Incomes (300 Owner and 153 Tenant 
Farms, Lenawee County, Michigan)" 





Working owners 


Tenants renting for cash 


Tenants renting for share 


Size 

of 
farm, 
acres 


Num- 
ber 
of 
farms 


Aver- 
age 
size 
of 

farm 


Aver- 
age 
farm 

in- 
come 


Aver- 
age 
labor 

in- 
come 


Num- 
ber 
of 
farms 


Aver- 
age 
size 
of 

farm 


Aver- 
age 
farm 
in- 
come 


Aver- 
age 
labor 
in- 
come 


Num- 
ber 
of 
farms 


Aver- 
age 

size 
farm 


Aver- 
age 
farm 
in- 
come 


Aver- 
age 
labor 
in- 
come 


60 and less. . 

60-100 

101-160 

Over 160. . . 


66 

124 

72 

38 


45 

84 

129 

223 


$ 540 

922 

1,172 

2,272 


$ 277 

445 

434 

1,047 


7 

14 

8 

4 


38 

86 

131 

216 


$ 500 

730 

728 

1,214 


$ 456 

648 

614 

1,078 


4 
35 
57 
24 


37 

84 

133 

230 


$278 
526 
630 
889 


$249 
474 
553 

777 


All farms. . . 


300 


104 


81,069 


S 481 


33 


102 


8 739 


$ 651 


120 


125 


$640 


$564 



New York. 

Table 101. — Effect of Area op Farms upon Profits (586 New York Farms 

Operated by Owners)^"- 



Acres 


Number 

of 

farms 


Average 
size, 
acres 


Labor 
income 


30 or less / 


30 

108 

214 

143 

57 

34 


21 

49 

83 

124 

177 

261 


$168 


31 to 60 


254 


61 to 100 


373 


101 to 150 


436 


151 to 200 


635 


Over 200 


946 






Totals and average 


586 


103 


$415 



Missouri. 
Table 102. — Effect of Area of Farm upon Lvibor Incomes (Missouri) ^^ 



Size of farm, acres 


Labor income 


Owner 


Part owner 


Tenant 


40 or less 


$128 
130 
213 
411 
424 
924 


$ 139 
268 
383 
508 
874 
2,150 


$183 


41 to 80 


304 


81 to 120 


339 


121 to 200 


719 


201 to 400 


940 


Over 400 


115 







FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 281 

Eastern Nebraska. 
Table 103. — Effect op Area of Farm upon Labor Income (Eastern Nebraska) "s 



Area of farms, in acres 



Average 

area per 

farm 



Number of 

farms 
averaged 



Average 

labor income 

per farm 



40 to 100. 
101 to 150. 
151 to 200. 
201 to 250. 
251 to 320. 
Over 320. . . 

All farms 



80.0 
124.0 
167.0 
237.0 
292.0 
423.0 



207.5 



20 
27 
68 
33 
27 
20 



195 



$122 
355 
323 
684 
444 
324 



Summary of Survey Findings, Effect of Size of Farm upon Income. ^^ 
Here the farm profits for small, medium, and large-sized businesses are 
shown for a number of areas. The farms are divided in size-groups on 
the basis of the measure which seems to indicate best the size of business 
for each area under study. Whether the chance of receiving a good 
income in these areas is best in operating a small business, a medium- 
sized business, or a large business, is answered in the following table. 
Table 104. — Effect of Area of Farm upon Income 



Areas 



Num- 
ber 
of 

farms 



Labor income. 
Average of farms with 



Small 
busi- 
ness 


Medium 

business 


$686 


$ 


867 


189 




304 


475 




816 


221 




282 


148 




228 


342 




518 


340 




501 


278 




408 


943 


1 


,587 


555 




431 


180 




291 


221 




328 


66 




94 


174 




741 



Large 
busi- 
ness 



Percentage of return 
on investment. Aver- 
age of farms with 



Small 
busi- 
ness- 


Medium 
business 


7.8 


8.6 


3.4 


4.6 


7.0 


9.2 


2.6 


4.1 


1.9 


3.4 


5.0 


5.6 


4.3 


6.1 


3.1 


4.5 


4.6 


5.7 


3.5 


3.2 


3.2 


5.1 


5.4 


6.5 


2.2 


3.2 


5.5 


8.9 



Large 

busi- 
ness 



Gloucester Co., N. J 

Frederick Co., Md 

Chester Co., Pa 

Mercer Co., Pa 

Washington Co., Ohio 

Clinton Co., Ind 

Lenawee Co., Mich 

Dane Co., Wis 

Tama Co., Iowa 

Warren Co., Iowa 

Barry and Lawrence Co., 

Mo 

Palouse area, Washington 

and Idaho 

Skagit Co., Wash 

Sumter Co., Ga 



125 
150 
502 
349 

25 
100 
453 

60 
210 
184 

244 

246 
202 
280 



;i,479 
611 

1,242 
354 
432 
828 
725 
542 

1,837 
918 

628 

756 

244 

2,435 



11.2 
5.8 

10.4 
4.9 
5.8 
5.7 
6.2 
4.9 
5.6 
4.6 

7.4 

7.4 
5.2 
9.9 



282 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Effect of Amount of Working Capital upon Income. — Size of business 
may also be measured in terms of amounts of working capital. Examples 
follow. 

Corn Belt. — The relation of the farm owner's capital to his income on 
273 farms in Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa'' was found to be: 

Table 105. — Relation of Capital to Income — Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa 



Size of business in capital 




Average labor 
income 



S 5,000 and less. . 
5,001 to 10,000 
10,001 to 15,000 
15,001 to 20,000 
20,001 to 30,000 
30,001 to 40,000 
40,001 to 60,000 
60,001 to 80,000. 
80,000 and over. 



I 74 

45 

283 

265 

264 

483 

315 

1,114 

1,804 



In this study it was found that of the entire number nine men with 
less than S5,000 capital received S74 for their year's work. Only two 
farmers out of 46 with less than $10,000 invested made over $400. Out 
of the entire 273 only 12 men received over $2,000 labor income. Each 
of these had more than $20,000 invested. The chance of a farm owner's 
making a labor income of $1,000 with less than $15,000 invested is less 
than 1 in 20. 

New York. — Relation of capital to profits as shown by 615 New York 
farms operated by owners:''^ 

Table 106. — Relation of Capital to Income — New York 



Capital 




Average labor 



$ 2,000 or less.... 
2,001 to 4,000 
4,001 to 6,000 
6,001 to 8,000 
8,001 to 10,000 
10,001 to 15,000 

Over 15,000 



{ 192 
240 
399 
530 
639 
870 

1,164 



FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 



283 



Missouri. — Relation of capital to labor income was determined for 
Missouri to be:^^ 

Table 107. — Relation of Capital to Income — Missouri 



Capital 



Labor income, 



Owner 



Part 
owner 



Tenant 



S 2,000 or less. . . 

2,001 to 4,000 

4,001 to 6,000 

6,001 to 8,000 

8,001 to 10,000 

10,001 to 15,000 

15,001 to 25,000 

25,001 and over. 



$ 42 
171 
148 
172 
282 
267 
702 
829 



i 243 
220 
298 
372 
343 
618 
752 

1,450 



$211 
258 
288 
401 
424 
769 
952 
593 



Nebraska. — Relation between capital per farm and other financial 
factors for farms studied in Nebraska resulted in:^* 



Table 108. 


— Relation 


of Capital to Income — Nebraska 


Capital 


per farm 




Farm income 


Labor income 


Under $10,000 


$ 596 
1,012 
1,398 
2,790 

$1,717 


$214 


$10,000 to 18,000 


272 


18 , 000 to 25 , 000 


352 


25,000 to 35,000 


399 


Average 






$385 



Kentucky. — Capital and incomes on farms of different sizes in Ken- 
tucky range :^^ 

Table 109. — Relation op Capital to Income — Kentucky 



Total average capital 


Number of farms 


Farm income 


Labor income 


$12,502 


19 


$1,083 


$ 473 


21,241 


48 


1,537 


518 


30,697 


51 


2,015 


595 


48,618 


33 


2,554 


299 


75,836 


15 


4,809 


1,542 


97,009 


12 


6,504 


2,130 


$37,793 (All farms) 


178 


$2,419 


$ 686 



284 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Arizona. — Effect of the amount of capital upon farm income and labor 
income on 446 owner farms in the irrigated valleys of southern Arizona 
was found to be:^^ 

Table 110. — Relation of Capital to Income — Arizona 



Capital invested 



Number of 
farms 



Farm 
income 



Labor 
income 



$ 5,000 and under. 
5,001 to 8,000 
8,001 to 12,000 
12,001 to 16,000 
16,001 to 20,000 
20,001 to 30,000 
30,001 to 50,000 
50,001 to 167,962 

All farms 



32 
57 
100 
63 
63 
52 
45 
34 

446 



$ 523 
833 
1,356 
1,947 
1,995 
2,490 
4,064 
8,721 

$2,370 



S241 
299 
578 
818 
577 
558 
1,043 
2,108 

$ 713 



Effect of the amount of capital invested by tenant on farm income and 
labor income on 96 tenant farms in the irrigated valleys of southern 
Arizona/^ 

Table 111. — Relation of Tenant's Capital to Income — Arizona 



Capital invested by tenant 



Number of 
farms 



Tenant's Tenant's 

farm income labor income 



$1,000 and under 
1,001 to 2,000. . 
2,001 to 3,000. . 
3,001 to 5,000. . 
5,001 to 8,000. . 
Over 8,000 

All farms 



11 
31 
13 
17 
11 
13 

96 



K 593 
868 
1,428 
1,671 
2,474 
4,104 

SI, 677 



$ 582 
749 
1,222 
1,366 
1,937 
3,273 

$1,377 



Michigan. — Relation of capital to labor income on 300 owner 
farms, Lenawee County, Michigan gave:^^ 

Table 112. — Relation of Capital to Income — Michigan 



Capital 




Average labor 
income 



$ 7,000 and less. . 

7,001 to 11,000 

11,001 to 15,000 

15,001 to 20,000 

Over 20,000 

All farms 



I 276 
386 
488 
569 

1,139 

$481 



FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 



285 



Effect upon Income of Efficient Use of Land, Equipment, and Labor. — 

Many farmers realize but meager incomes because the business of each is 
small. Such men often feel that the farm business is sufficiently large to 
keep them busy the entire year, when, as a matter of fact, the actual 
results accomplished represent less than a half year's work. An acre of 
hay normally requires 8 to 10 hr. of man labor, or approximately 1 day's 
work for each cutting; an acre of wheat, 15 to 20 hr.; an acre of potatoes, 
80 to 110 hr.; caring for and feeding a dairy cow, 150 to 200 hr. per year. 
Only about 250 to 275 days are actually available for productive work. 
Much time is lost in doing jobs about the farm which take time, but really 
count for little. A farmer may keep busy the whole year, but if he has 
accomplished during that time only such work as should normally be done 
in 200 days his wages will be in proportion. A large volume of business 
may be done on a farm of few acres, while only a small business may be 
conducted on a poorly managed farm of much larger acreage. Without' 
reasonable size of business there is little opportunity for a satisfactory 
profit in farming. 

The larger the farm, the more efficient is likely to be the use of labor, 
horses, and working capital. 

Examples of Effect upon Income of Efficient Use of Land, Equipment, 
and Labor. — Extracts from farm management surveys well illustrate 
this. 



Pennsylvania. 

Table 113. — Effect upon Incomes of Efficient Use of Labor and Working 
Capital (Chester County, Pennsylvania, Owners)^ 



Sizes of farms in 
acres 



Productive 

work units 

per farm 



Man Horse 



Crop 

acres 

per 

man 



Man 

labor 

per crop 

acre 



Value 

of labor 

per 

month 
per man 



Crop 

acres 

per 

work 

horse 



Value of 

machinery 

per crop 

acre 



13 to 40... 

41 to 60. . . 

61 to 80. . . 

81 to 100. . . 
101 to 120. . . 
121 to 160. . . 
160 and over 

All sizes. . . . , 



184 
299 
372 
475 
551 
582 
856 



82 
140 
177 
226 
259 
286 
444 



439 



211 



13.7 


$20.74 


$23.93 


9.0 


20.2 


15.78 


26.60 


11.9 


23.2 


13.98 


27.12 


13.9 


25.2 


13.46 


28.30 


14.5 


25.6 


13.64 


29.22 


15.0 


29.0 


11.80 


28.50 


16.8 


31.1 


13.05 


33.77 


17.4 


24.7 


$13.69 


$28.27 


14.7 



515.11 
12.57 
11.92 
10.79 
11.80 
9.20 
8.94 



10.88 



286 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Utah. 
Table 114. — Relation of Size of Farm to Crop Area per Work Horse, Utah^" 





Size of farms, 
acres 


Crop area per 
horse, acres 


Small farms 


20.5 

59.6 

178.0 


8.3 


General and fruit . 


11.2 


Grain and live stock 


12.0 







Michigan. 

Table 115. — Relation of Size of Farm to Annual Cost of Buildings, Fences, 
AND Machinery per Farm and per Acre (Lenawee County, Michigan) '^ 



All farms 



Farms with each specified acreage 



60 acres 
and less 



61 to 100 
acres 



101 to 
160 acres 



Over 160 
acres 



Number of farms 


300 

$143.00 
19 
26 


66 

$ 99.00 
14 
14 


124 

$128.00 
16 
23 


72 

$164.00 
25 
32 


38 


Annual cost per farm 

Buildings 

Fences 

Implements and machinery. 


$226.00 
27 
50 


Total 

Annual cost per acre 


$188.00 
$ 1.81 


$127.00 

$ 2.85 


$167.00 
$ 1.99 


$221.00 
$ 1.71 


$303.00 
$ 1.36 



Georgia. 

Table 116. — Relation of Number of Productive Days Mule Labor per Mule 

to Farm Returns, Acres per Mule, and Cost op Mule Labor per Day 

(Brooks County, Georgia)^^ 



Productive days mule labor per mule 


Number of 
farms 


Average 
number of 
mule days 

per mule 


Cost of 

mule labor 

per day 


75 and less 


12 
26 
33 
21 
14 

106 


62 

88 

112 

137 

172 

113 


$1.70 


76 to 100 


1.23 


101 to 125 


1.00 


126 to 150 


0.84 


151 and over 


0.72 


All farms 


$1.07 







FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 



287 



Table 117. — Relation of Crop Area per Work Animal to Farm Efficiency 
(Anderson County, Georgia)''^ 



Number of crop acres per work animal 


Number of 
farms 


Percentage 
of return 
on invest- 
ment 


Income per 
mule 


11 or less 


7 
13 
33 
28 
23 

6 


2.64 
3.30 
3.67 
4.32 
3.62 
2.86 


$238 


12 to 15 


267 


16 to 19 


324 


20 to 23 


422 


24 to 27 


396 


28 or more 


386 







Texas. 
Table 118.- 



-Relation of Size op Farm to Efficiency of Horse Labor (Ellis 
County, Texas)' 



Size of crop area 



Number 

of 

farms 



Average 

size of 

crop area 



Horse 

days per 

horse 



Acres 

per 

horse 



Horse 
days 
per 
acre 



Cost of 
horse 
labor 

per crop 
acre 



Cost of 

work 

stock 

per day 

of labor 



80 acres or less. . . 

81 to 120 acres. . . 
121 acres and more 

All farms 



37 
39 
38 

114 



62.5 
100.1 
188.9 

117.5 



60.3 
66.7 
79.1 

71.7 



18.5 


3.25 


$5.47 


20.6 


3.22 


4.95 


25.2 


3.14 


3.99 


22.4 


3.19 


$4.53 



$1.68 
1.54 
1.27 



Cor7i Belt. 
Table 119. — Relation of Size of Farm to Number of Crop Acres on Which 
A Horse Can Be Utilized (700 Farms in Indiana, Illinois and Iowa)^! 



Area, acres 



Farms 



Number 



Average 

size, 
acres 



Average 

crop area, 

acres 



Average 

number of 

work 

horses 



Crop area 

per horse, 

acres 



40 and less. 

41 to 80. . 
81 to 120. . 

121 to 160. . 
161 to 200. . 
201 to 240. . 
241 to 280. . 
281 to 320. . 
321 to 400. . 
401 to 560. . 
561 to 720. . 
721 to 1,250 



45 

114 

120 

130 

93 

75 

35 

37 

30 

12 

5 

4 



36.6 
71.4 
107.2 
149.3 
183.6 
227.4 
262.5 
305.6 
364.1 
474.8 
652.6 
991.2 



26.4 
56.7 
86.0 
122.4 
143.4 
184.9 
211.2 
233.8 
298.0 
368.6 
555.4 
612.0 



2.8 

3.6 

4.5 

5.8 

6.6 

7.8 

8.4 

9.5 

10.8 

13.1 

19.4 

19.0 



9.4 
15.7 
19.1 
21.1 
21.7 
23.7 
25.1 
24.6 
27.6 
28.1 
28.6 
32.2 



288 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Kentucky. 

Table 120. — Relation of Size of Farm to Utilization of Labor, Power, and 

Machinery (Kentucky)'^ 







Percent- 


Percent- 










age of 


age of avail- 


Cost of 


Cost of 


Size of farms, acres 


Number 


available 


able time 


work stock 


machinery 




of farms 


time util- 


utilized 


per power 


per power 






ized by 


by work 


unit 


unit 






man labor 


stock 






Less than 100 


19 


78 


27 


$2 68 


$0 46 


100 to 200 


48 


95 


28 


1.84 


0.35 


201 to 300 


51 


87 


33 


1.54 


0.21 


301 to 500 


33 


84 


33 


1.78 


0.17 


501 to 700 


15 


80 


37 


1.36 


0.13 


0,ver 700 


12 


80 


48 


1.18 


07 







Ways of Increasing the Size of the Farm Business. — There are a 
number of ways of increasing the size of the farm business, some of which 
are: 

1. Procuring Additional Land. — By buying or renting more land 
farmers owning or renting small farms often rent additional land adjoin- 
ing. This permits the use of a larger area with comparatively little 
additional capital. 

2. Use of More Intensive Crops. — Growing crops requiring more labor, 
that is, following a more intensive form of farming. One hundred acres 
devoted to corn, oats, wheat, etc., which may not be sufficient to keep 
two men busy, can easily be increased to a full two-man farm by the 
addition of a few acres of such crops as sugar beets, potatoes, or fruit, 
depending upon the market demand. Many persons have made the 
mistake of buying a small area, with the intention of following an inten- 
sive type of agriculture in localities where there is no market for the 
products of such farming. The fact that land is suitable for truck crops 
is not sufficient justification for attempting to grow them. There must 
be the possibility of disposing of the products at remunerative prices. 

3. Addition of Live Stock. — The addition of more live stock, sometimes 
even beyond the point where the farm itself will support them. This 
is a practice followed by a large number of dairy farmers in some of the 
eastern states. This necessitates the purchase of feed where the nature 
of the land is such as to prohibit the raising of grain as cheaply as it can 
be bought, or where the production of roughages and succulent feeds is 
more profitable than grain growing. Loss is liable to result in this 
undertaking unless the additional animals are of high producing quality. 
This is the one way open to many farmers whose business would otherwise 
be too small to give them a good living. The success of many farms is in 



FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 289 

large measure dependent upon the number of high-quality cows or other 
live stock that can be kept. 

4. Outside Work. — By performing work outside the farm, such as 
teaming or working at lumbering during the winter. In many farming 
regions the opportunity for using this source of income is very limited. 

No one realizes better than the farmer that as a rule no phenomenal 
profits can be expected, and persons going into farming as a business 
should consider this fact. Agriculture is a good life work; it will pay 
wages and moderate returns on investment, provided both capital 
and labor are wisely expended. Large success is most difficult to attain, 
however, unless the farm business is large enough to permit the efficient 
use of capital, labor, and managerial ability. 

Quality of Business as Affecting Profits 

Illustrations from surveys showing the effect upon income of crop 
yields and production per animal — matters of quality of business — are 
recorded below. 

Limitations to Improving Quality of the Business. — The results of 
available studies seem to show that in crop production the point of dim- 
inishing returns has been reached, nationally speaking, while in stock- 
raising this does not appear as yet to be the case. This means that in 
crop production it is possible to reach a stage beyond which to increase 
yields necessitates costs out of proportion to the possible income, so that 
the additional yields may cost more than the values of these yields and 
be at the expense of farm profits. Excessive fertilization, or extra man 
labor at high wages may sum up expense beyond the value of the resultant 
returns. But production per unit of stock, so high that the cost of ob- 
taining such increase is excessive, does not seem, from the survey findings, 
to have as yet been reached. 

Influence of Crop Yields upon Farm Profits. — Crop yields greatly 
influence farm profits. Some farmers make fair profits with low yields 
because some other phase of the farm business is sufficiently developed 
to offset the poor yields, but it is doubtless true that these same farmers 
could make more money with higher yields. Profits increase at least 
until yields are obtained considerably above the average for the region, 
but beyond this limit very high yields are liable to be obtained at the 
expense of farm profits. 

Where Greater Profit-taking Is Easier. — It is both easier and more 
profitable to increase low acre yields than high ones, and a small product 
per fowl or animal than a large one. In.x3ther words, profits can be in- 
creased most easily by attention to the weakest points in a system of 
farming. The more vital the weakness, the greater is the increase in 
profits that can be made by the proper correction. 

19 



290 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Examples of the Effect of Crop Yields upon Income. Kentucky. — 
The relation of crop yield to labor income was determined for Kentucky 
to be:" 



Table 121. — Effect of Crop Yields upon 


[ncome — Kentucky 


Crop index 


Number of 
records 


Size of farm, 
acres, 


Labor 
income 


90 or less 


35 
37 
47 
30 

29 


303 
297 
273 
362 
341 


$ 217 


91 to 100 


519 


101 to 110 


701 


Ill to 120 


1,080 


Over 120 


1,103 







Texas. — The relation of yield to cost of corn, 19 crops, 114 farms, 
Ellis County, Tex., amounted to:^ 

Table 122. — Effect of Crop Yields upon Costs of Corn — Texas 



Yield per acre 



[Number of records 



Cost per bushel 



20 bushels or less. . 

21 to 30 bushels. . . 
31 bushels or more. 
All crops 



37 

62 

20 

119 



$0.94 
0.53 
0.45 
0.58 



Oregon. 

Table 123.— Effect of Crop Yields on Farm Income (212 Farms in Marion and 
Polk Counties, Oregon)'^ 



Soil Type 


Crop index 


Number farms 


Average farm 
income 


Salem clay 




91 and less 

92 to 106 
107 and over 

89 and less 

90 to 109 

1 10 and over 


23 
23 
22 
43 
50 
51 


$ 653 
1,085 


Silt loam 


1,596 

746 

1,485 




1,940 



FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 



291 



Ohio. — Effect of size (crop area) and quality of business upon labor 
income (245 farm records, Palmer Township, Washington County, Ohio) 
was determined to be:^^ 



Table 124. — Effect of Quality 


OF Crops and Stock upon Incomes — Ohio 






Labor income 


Size (crop area), acres 


Poor 
quality (a) 


Medium 
quality (b) 


Good 
quality (c) 


30 acres and less 


$63 

88 


$ 72 
125 
213 


$137 


31 to 45 


214 


Over 45 


453 







(a) Poor quality includes: Poor crops and poor stock; poor crops and medium 
stock; medium crops and poor stock. 

(5) Medium quality includes: Poor crops and good stock, medium crops and 
medium stock; good crops and poor stock. 

(c) Good quality includes: Medium crops and good stock; good crops and medium 
stock; good crops and good stock. 



Missouri. — Relation of crop yields to labor income from Missouri 
studies^^ was found to be: 

Table 125. — Effect of Crop Yields upon Income — Missouri 



Crops index, per cent 



Labor income 



Owners Part owners 



Tenants 



60 per cent or less 

61 to 75 

76 to 90 

91 to 110 

Ill to 130 

130 and over 



$ 46 
-21 
72 
376 
554 
678 



5 -26 

51 

442 

484 

1,040 
920 



$105 
128 
473 
601 

857 
908 



292 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Survey Findings. — A more condensed and easier measure of com- 
parison follows :^^ ' 

Table 126. — Effect of Crop Yields upon Incomes (Survey Data) 



Area 



Num- 

of 
farms 



Labor income. 

Average of farms 

with 



Poor 
yields 



Me- 
dium 
yields 



Good 
yields 



Percentage of return 

on investment. 

Average of farms 

with 



Poor 
yields 



Me- 
dium 
yields 



Good 
yields 



Gloucester County, New Jersey . . 

Frederick County Maryland 

Chester County, Pennsylvania. . . 
Mercer County, Pennsylvania. . . 

Washington County, Ohio 

Clinton County, Indiana 

Lenawee County, Michigan 

Dane County, Wisconsin 

Tama County, Iowa 

Warren County, Iowa 

Barry and Lawrence Counties, 

Missouri 

Palouse Area, Washington and 

Idaho 

Skagit County, Washington 

Sumter County, Georgia 



125 


$515 


$ 923 


$1,609 


4.5 


8.7 


150 


181 


371 


551 


3.6 


4.7 


502 


508 


892 


1,129 


6.1 


9.1 


349 


129 


303 


423 


1.4 


4.5 


25 


165 


284 


364 


2.0 


3.9 


100 


198 


583 


890 


3.9 


5.5 


453 


284 


517 


765 


3.8 


5.7 


60 


266 


407 


561 


3.6 


4.0 


210 


676 


1,309 


2,158 


4.2 


5.3 


184 


233 


725 


936 


2.5 


4.0 


244 


120 


355 


682 


2.2 


5.4 ' 


246 


119 


434 


750 


5.1 


6.5 


202 


49 


147 


214 


2.7 


3.9 


280 


57 


1,124 


2,230 


4.2 


8.5 



14.5 
5.5 

11.3 
5.8 
5.2 
6.9 
7.1 
4.9 
6.2 
4.8 

8.6 

7.8 

4.1 

11.5 



Influence of Live Stock Receipts upon Farm Profits. — On farms where 
live stock predominates, the quality of the stock is very important. On 
a majority of farms, except in the South and certain of the Western States, 
more of the crops are fed to live stock than are sold direct. On many 
farms the animals are fed with the crops, hence the production of these 
is a most important factor in farm profits. The best of corn and hay 
crops will count for little when fed to animals that make returns below 
the market prices for these crops. On the other hand, good hve stock 
on the individual farms may not be profitable if not fed and cared for 
economically. 

Good dairy stock adds materially to success in dairy farming. The 
following tabulation, based upon dairy income per dairy animal unit, 
clearly brings out this fact. 

Examples of the Influence of Live Stock Receipts upon Farm Profits. 
Arizona. — Effect of quality in dairy live stock upon success in dairy farm- 
ing in the irrigated valleys of southern Arizona'* ^ was found to be: 



FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 293 

Table 127. — Effect of Receipts per Cow upon Dairy Incomes — Arizona 





Average 








Income per dairy animal 


dairy in- 
come per 
dairy animal 
unit 


Number of 
farms 


Average 
farm income 


Average 
labor income 


$55 and under 


$ 47 


36 


$1,709 


$ 357 


$55 01 to $ 65 


60 


50 


2,405 


826 


$65 01 to $ 80 


72 


45 


2,818 


1,207 


$80.01 to $100 


89 


32 


2,380 


1,041 


Over $100(a) 


124 


29 


3,249 


1,745 







(a) Some of the farmers in this group retailed their milk. 

Michigan. — Relation of receipts per cow to labor income, 212 owner 
farms, Lenawee County, Michigan^^ worked out to: 
Table 128. — Effect of Receipts per Cow upon Labor Incomes — Michigan" 





Having five or more cows 


Receipts per cow 


Number of 
farms 


Average of 

number of 

cows 


Average 

receipts per 

cow 


Average 

labor 

income 


$40 and less 


38 
37 
35 
37 
41 
24 

212 


8 

9 

10 

9 

11 

10 

9 


$ 29 
46 
56 
65 
79 
105 

$ 61 


$ 245 


$41 to $50 


361 


$51 to $60 


401 


$61 to $70 


542 


$71 to $90 


915 


Over $90 


1,053 


All farms 


$ 564 







Pennsylvania. — Relation of receipts per cow to labor income, Pennsyl- 
vania owner farms, amounted to:^ 
Table 129. — Effect of Receipts per Cow upon Labor Incomes — Pennsylvania' 



Divided according to receipts per 
cow 


Five and more cows 


Number of 
farms 


Average 
receipts 
per cow 


Labor 
income 


$ 50 and less 


48 
43 
27 
51 
24 
39 
29 
28 


$ 42 
68 
57 
75 
86 
96 
110 
138 


$ 418 


$ 51 to $ 60 


592 


$ 61 to $ 70 


783 


$ 71 to $ 80 


782 


$ 81 to $ 90 


831 


$ 91 to $100 


1,185 


$101 to $120 


1,422 


Over $120 


1,602 


Total 


289 


80 


$ 906 







294 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Within the Hmits found in this survey the labor income increases 
markedly as the income per cow increases. Forty-eight farmers received 
$50 or less income per cow. Their labor income was 45 per cent below 
the general average. Twenty-eight farms had incomes per cow of more 
than- $120, and their labor incomes were 75 per cent above the average. 

Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. — Findings concerning income 
on dairy farms as affected by receipts from cows on the cut-over lands of 
Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, average of 164 farms, showed :^^ 

Table 130. — Effect of Receipts per Cow upon Incomes — Michigan, Wisconsin, 

AND Minnesota 



Grouping 


Number 

of 

farms 


Average 
number 
of cows 


Average 
income 
per cow 


Farm 
income 


Labor 
income 


Less than $50 


64 
96 


8 
12 


$35.10 
72.30 


$ 35.75 
700.00 


$-266.75 


$50 or more 


122.30 







Survey Data. — A condensed presentation is tabulated below :^^ 
Table 131. — Effect of Returns from Live Stock upon Incomes (Survey Data) 



Area 



No. 
of 

farms 



Labor income 



Average of farms 
with 



Percentage of return 

on investment. 

Average of farms 

with 



Poor 
live- 
stock 

re- 
turns 



Me- 
dium 
live- 
stock 

re- 
turns 


Good 
live- 
stock 

re- 
turns 


Poor 
live- 
stock 

re- 
turns 


Me- 
dium 
live- 
stock 

re- 
turns 



Frederick County, Maryland. . . . 
Chester County, Pennsylvania. . . 
Mercer County, Pennsylvania. . . 

Washington County, Ohio 

Clinton County, Indiana 

Lenawee County, Michigan 

Dane County, Wisconsin 

Tama County, Iowa 

Warren County, Iowa 

Barry and Lawrence Counties, 

Missouri 

Palouse Area, Washington and 

Idaho 

Skagit County, Washington 



Good 
live- 
stock 
re- 
turns 



150 


$ 76 


$ 285 $ 737 


2.8 


4.5 


502 


413 


912 


1,215 


5.0 


9.6 


349 


136 


244 


473 


1.4 


3.9 


25 


54 


243 


528 


0.2 


3.5 


100 


82 


605 


995 


3.6 


5.7 


453 


208 


543 


817 


2.8 


5.9 


60 


-9 


500 


740 


1.7 


4.7 


210 


726 


1,271 


2,137 


4.2 


4.9 


184 


-70 


631 


1,339 


2.0 


3.8 


244 


223 


317 


541 


3.2 


4.5 


246 


250 


463 


577 


5.5 


6.5 


246 


-79 


100 


393 


1.7 


3.8 



6.5 
12.0 
6.3 
7.6 
6.9 
7.8 
6.2 
6.6 
5.5 

7.7 

7.2 
5.3 



FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 



295 



Effect of All Four Factors upon Incomes. — The results of the effect of 
size of business, yield of crops, production of live stock, and efficiency 
in the use of labor, are evidence that no one of these is the determining 
factor for success. Size of business is very important, but a large busi- 
ness conducted without attention to these other factors will probably 
result in a loss. In Table 132 is shown the effect upon profits of having 
one, two, three, or all four factors (size of business, crop yields, produc- 
tion of live stock, or efficiency in the use of labor) better than the 
average of the region. Those with two of these factors better than 
the average make more than those with only one, and those with all 
four factors above the average far excel all others in profits. Only a 
small proportion, usually less than 10 per cent, of the farms are better 
than the average in all four respects, while from 20 to 30 per cent of the 
farms in each area have only one factor better than the average of the 
region, and from 9 to 21 per cent of the farms are below the average in all 
four factors. 



Table 132. — Effect upon Farm Profits if One, Two, Three or Four of the 
Factors Affecting Farm Incomes {i.e., Size of Business, Crop Yields, 
Returns from Live Stock, and Efficient Use op Labor) Are 
above the Average of the Region'^ 



Area 



Num- 
ber 
of 

farms 



Farms above the average of the region in 



One factor 



Per- 
cent- 
age 
of 

total 
farms 



Aver- 
age 

labor 
in- 



Two factors 



Per- 
cent- 
age 
of 
total 
farms 



Aver- 
age 
labor 



Three factors 



Per- 
cent- 
age 
of 
total 
farms 



Aver- 
age 
labor 
in- 
come 



Four factors 



Per- 
cent- 
age 
of 
total 
farms 



Aver- 
age 
labor 



Frederick County, Maryland. . . . 
Chester County, Pennsylvania. . 
Mercer County, Pennsylvania. . . 

Washington County, Ohio 

Clinton County, Indiana 

Lenawee County, Michigan 

Dane County, Wisconsin 

Tama County, Iowa 

Warren County, Iowa 

Barry and Lawrence Counties, 

Missouri 

Palouse Area, Washington and 

Idaho 

Skagit County, Washington 



150 
502 
349 

25 
100 
453 

60 
210 
184 

244 

246 
202 



28 
26 
28 
31 
27 
24 
24 
29 
28 

22 

29 
27 



6 94 
432 
190 
137 
252 
321 
165 
512 
351 

168 

117 
15 



39 
38 
35 
21 
29 
36 
35 
30 
36 



33 
35 



t 400 
827 
304 
176 
496 
467 
345 

1,352 
629 

450 

501 
160 



19 
21 
19 
20 
22 
20 
25 
25 
16 



$ 774 

1,339 

424 

480 

943 

930 

655 

2,480 

1,339 

527 

1,069 
190 



7 
14 
9 
7 
6 
5 
8 

13 

7 



$1,288 
1,907 
665 
611 
1,606 
1,241 
1,044 
3,700 
1,662 



1,186 
673 



Influence of High Prices on Profits. — A study of 10 farms producing 
fruit, poultry, stock, or field crops, in Napa County, California, for the years 
1917-18-19 reflects the prosperity due to high prices received for farm 



296 FARM MANAGEMENT 

products. Continuous records for these farms resulted in findings as 
follows: 

Table 133. — Effect of High Prices upon Profits — California 

1917 1918 1919 

Capital $10,461.00 $10,814.00 $11,293.00 

Receipts 2,476.48 3,052.19 3,736.26 

Expenses 1,409.17 1,585.60 1,867.80 

Farm income 1,359.07 1,775.33 2,358.15 

Laborincome .' 722.78 1,178.44 1,69850 

Twenty farms in several counties of the same State show the same 
thing for the two years of 1918-19. 

1918 1919 

Capital $21 ,206 $21 ,706 

Receipts 4,016 4,748 

Expenses 2,807 2,906 

Farm income 1,741 2,473 

Labor income 765 1 ,326 

Increasing Profits by Curtailing Waste 

There are two ways to make money from farming. The first, and 
more commonly considered, is the direct method of producing crops, 
stock, and stock products for sale. The second method is ^n indirect, 
but by no means inconsequential way. It is to increase profits by 
curtailing, eliminating, and reducing waste. 

In many ways the elimination of waste can be brought about, so 
many in fact that any presentation must be confined to outlining a few 
suggestions. Other ways will readily come to the reader's mind, if he 
be at all familiar with farming operations. 

Ways of Curtailing Waste. — Ways of curtailing losses may be con- 
sidered under different groupings, to cover : 

(a) Curtailing losses caused by rodents and predatory animals. 
(6) Curtailing losses caused by weeds. 

(c) Curtailing losses caused by insects and fungi. 

(d) Curtailing losses caused by disease. 

(e) Saving energy of workers. 

(/) Eliminating unprofitable operations. 

(g) Curtailing lost motion. 

(h) Instituting methods to detect waste. 

(i) Curtailing operating waste. 

(j) Curtailing wastes in feeding stock. 

(k) Curtaihng wastes in boarding men. 

(Z) Eliminating unprofitable investments. 

(m) Eliminating excess labor. 



• FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 297 

Examples of Ways of Curtailing Waste Are Easy to Find. — An hour's 
travel in almost any farming community will show ways by which profits 
can be increased by remedying improper practices and plain carelessness. 
Such things can be found as young stock pastured on wet fields without 
shelter; failure to remove dead stock which, if diseased, might prove a 
source of general infection; failure to remove pelts and hides from dead 
animals, chicken yards wet and muddy; swollen streams carrying off top 
soil from freshly plowed fields where a little levee work would have kept 
the water within bounds; uncrowned country roads hub-deep in mud and 
all but impassable; improperly built, flat, uncrowned haj'^stacks incapable 
of shedding water; implements left in the fields unprotected from weather 
and soil; barnyards deep in water where a little draining would accomplish 
wonders; hogs and cattle on new alfalfa; grain in swales turning yellow 
for lack of attention to draining off surface water; woodwork of buildings 
unprotected by paint; structures blown over for failure to reinforce 
anchorage or foundation in time; weed seeds carried from ditchbanks to 
farmed fields; and so on, and so on. 

Sounds rather mournful, doesn't it? Yet the remedy is simple in 
most cases, if proper attention and forethought are but given to the 
details of the business. 

Curtailing Losses Caused by Rodents and Predatory Animals. — This 
means the destruction of rats, mice, gophers, moles, prairie dogs, ground 
squirrels, coyotes, skunks, weasels, wolves, hawks, and similar enemies 
of farming activities. It is beyond our scope to discuss methods of ridding 
the farm of pests, but full information concerning preventive and exter- 
minative measures should constitute a part of the working knowledge of 
every farm manager. So, too, is desirable a proper discrimination 
between friends and enemies: e.g., between hawks that harry poultry 
and the kindred species that live on rodents and noxious insects. 

Curtailment of Losses Caused by Weeds, Insects, and Fungi. — Injuri- 
ous insects, weeds, and fungi are important in direct ratio to their 
destructive abilities. The presence of wild morning glory, of Johnson 
grass, of sunflowers, of quack grass, of wild millet and others of a long list 
of weeds; the challenge of the codling moth, the gipsy moth, the potato 
beetle, the corn ear worm, the San Jose scale; the threat of grain rust, 
smut, potato blight, fruit scale, mildew, curly leaf, yellows; — all add to 
the operating costs, but if not met in a timely and proper manner they 
can, and often do, become very effective in reducing farm profits. 

To reduce or eliminate losses due to these causes necessitates a clear 
understanding of the life history of the pest under consideration, and a 
knowledge of the feasible methods of control. To comprehend properly 
a plan of control, involves at times an intensive and exhaustive study in 
order to control effectively. Further, it is necessary to be fully informed 
concerning State legislation which may affect one's permitting obnoxious 
weeds to grow on his lands or on the bordering roadside. 



298 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Curtailing Losses Caused by Animal Disease. — This has to do with 
the recognizing and the preventing or remedying of such troubles as 
glanders or founder in horses; tuberculosis in cattle and hogs; hoof -rot, 
worms, or scab in sheep; cholera in hogs; pneumonia in various life stock; 
blackleg in cattle; and a host of other such profit reducers. Here know- 
ledge is needed not only to recognize trouble, and to know its effect, and 
possible control, but to foster community regulations for the disposal 
of diseased stock. 

Saving Energy of Workers. — Consideration of saving energy of 
workers may begin with the owner or manager, whose efforts can be 
materially aided by planning in advance of the work for sufficient labor 
and equipment. The energy of the men can be increased by providing 
good sleeping quarters, by maintaining a reasonable work day, by in- 
sisting on Sunday rests, by providing good food, by furnishing bathing 
and washing facihties, by eliminating unnecessary walking, by keeping 
equipment in first class working order. The energy of the wife or cook 
can be conserved by furnishing running water; by mending leaking 
pumps; by cutting down the distance to the fuel supply; by pro- 
viding facilities for washing clothes; by adding ample shelf and cup- 
board room, sinks, and pantry space; by saving steps caused by long halls, 
many doors, or distance between household facilities; by keeping the 
kitchen cool in summer, by providing a screened, cool space for prepar- 
ing vegetables during the hot weather. 

Other ways of saving energy will suggest themselves, as a better 
arrangement of fields; fewer gates; use of colony instead of individual 
stock quarters; the supplying of ample power in plowing or other farm 
work ; concentrating work in farm operations to decrease supervision. 

Eliminating Unprofitable Operations. — Elimination of unprofitable 
operations is illustrated in the matter of farming hillsides so steep that 
the costs involved offset the profits which could be obtained if the same 
time and energy were expended elsewhere; in the use of steep farm roads 
where a gradual grade even at greater expense will ultimately reduce 
operating expenses more than enough to offset the cost of construction. 

Curtailing Lost Motion. — The use of inferior work stock, of poorly 
mated teams, of worn out equipment, of insufficient help, or of not 
enough capital, often cuts down profits. 

Establishing Methods to Detect Waste. — This refers to such pro- 
visions as a properly installed and properly kept system of farm books and 
records, and close study of all operations with a view to cutting down 
costs. Often such a system can be undei'taken to marked advantage. 

Reducing Various Waste. — These are legion. Agriculture offers 
abundant examples of items that can be utilized in efforts to increase 
profits. Such things can be considered as substitution of power machin- 
ery for hand labor, use of bonus system in piece work, building fences 



FACTORS AFFECTING PROFITS 299 

when the ground is wet and soft, timely repairing of buildings and imple- 
ments, keeping plow shares bright and sharp, using plenty of good grade 
oil on bearings, watering work stock often, especially in hot weather, 
covering sacked grain when stacked in the field, keeping mangers free of 
accumulations of dirt and dust, using straw instead of good hay for 
bedding, providing hens to pick up scattered grain, keeping a cat in the 
granary, keeping stock quarters clean, dry and sanitary, relying upon a 
good dog or two to kill rabbits, chase coyotes, protect property, kill 
gophers during irrigation or to drive cattle or sheep — these are all good 
ways to reduce operating costs. The ordering in advance of the season 
of parts to be held for emergencies or to replace those broken, the putting 
of implements in condition, the replacing of broken parts, painting wood 
greasing working surfaces, and equipping with wrenches and oil cans, — 
each is a profitable practice. The use of crude oil or distillate instead of 
wood or coal for heating and cooking is under some conditions in the 
interests of economy. 

Curtailing Wastes in Feeding Stock. — Reduction of this waste may 
be illustrated by feeding grain to work stock after they fill up on hay or 
after watering; in field-feeding stock cattle, by putting out hay in small 
piles so that all cattle will have a chance at this feed and little will thus 
be lost from trampling and dirtying; by having one man among a number 
of workmen act as feeder, so as to save wasteful feeding of pet teams; by 
the use of good hay for feed only and never for bedding; by grinding or 
soaking hard coated grains; by chopping hay for feeding purposes; by the 
use of cheaper substitutes when of equal feed value. 

Curtailing Wastes in Boarding Men. — Examples are numerous, as, 
e.g., insisting that hired cooks from time to time pick off sprouts from 
stored potatoes and onions, that potatoes be boiled unpeeled, that bread 
be cut in half slices to prevent waste, that soup bones be made into soups, 
surplus meat into hash, and waste bread into puddings, that lettuce and 
onions, because of their sedative effects, be served only at night, that men 
carry off no good food to feed stray dogs, that boiling meat occasionally 
be substituted for roast, that all meats be hung up in a cool place, pro- 
duced from flies, that hired cooks use tallow and fat instead of lard. 

Eliminating Unprofitable Investments and Surplus Labor. — This 
admonition needs no special consideration here, as the reader should 
readily find examples of conditions which, if corrected, will make for 
increased profits. 



CHAPTER XIV 
FINANCIAL FORECAST OF PROPOSED FARM PLANS 

A financial forecast, or "paper farm" as it is sometimes popularly 
called, is a try-out on paper of a proposed plan involving substantial 
money investments and transactions — a methodical predetermination, so 
far as possible, of the possibilities and probabilities of a given proposition. 

Objects of Financial Forecast. — To test a farm by paper methods 
usually gives exceedingly useful insights as to its financial feasibility, 
capital requirements, returns, limitations; into the decisions which must 
be faced; into a recognition of the amount and kinds of details that are 
likely to be met. And it provides a means of testing plans when one is 
established in a farm business, just as well as for testing proposed plans 
after a given industry has been chosen and a farm selected. 

Limitation of Financial Forecasts. — Novices figuring from available 
tables conclude about as follows: "The profit per hen is stated to be $1 
per year. With 5,000 hens, I am assured of a $5,000 income," or, "beans 
yield 1,000 lb. under the local conditions of the farm I have in mind to 
buy. They are worth 3f^ a pound on the average. They cost $20 per 
acre to produce. I can therefore obtain the gross income I desire — 
$1,200— from 120 acres." 

In actual practice, as every practical farmer well knows, the "paper 
profits" of the paper farm turn out a good deal differently — smaller 
profits will accrue in practice where large profits show on paper, greater 
losses will occur in practice than the preliminary figuring shows. The 
reason is to be found in the occurrence of elements which can not be figured 
in a preliminary plan, as they can not be foretold with any degree of 
accuracy. Presence of destructive weeds, insect pests, or certain 
fungi may seriously curtail production of major crops. Accidents to 
machinery, to implements, to work stock, to the men or to the operator, 
may seriously cripple operations and act as definite profit reducers. 
Lack of capable help in rush seasons, when the work is most pressing, a 
cold spell when warm sunny weather is needed, or hot spells when cool 
weather is most to be desired, hot drying winds at blossoming time, and 
drouth, are definite depressors of profit. So are floods, with their atten- 
dant washing, sediment depositing, excess watering, cutting new channels, 
and changing old sources of water supplies. So is fire. So is over-pro- 
duction with attendant low prices. Then to the regular work must be 
added items of extra work around the farm which are usually overlooked 

300 



FINANCIAL FORECAST OF PROPOSED FARM PLANS 301 

in a preliminary study, such as time and labor spent in cleaning ditches, 
repairing levees, cleaning barns and corrals, moving stock, feeding stock, 
cutting firewood, harvesting ice, clearing roads, repairing buildings and 
fences, etc. 

Justification of Financial Forecasts. — When these things are pointed 
out to the operating or would-be farmer who has been taken with the 
idea of paper farming, the first query he advances is, "Then, why go to 
the work of testing out a scheme on paper?" There are good reasons 
why the method is worth a trial by one investigating farming conditions, 
be he old and wise or a novice. 

Necessitates Collection of Data. — The first reason is that in trying out 
a given scheme most individuals find it both desirable and necessary to 
collect a lot of data in regard to methods of handling crops and stock, 
cost items, and the similar matters which otherwise are likely to be 
passed over as immaterial or overlooked altogether. 

Shows Probable Profits. — Secondly, when a given scheme is thoroughly 
tested out on paper it falls into one of three classes; it shows a profit, it 
shows a loss, or it falls on a deadline between profit and loss. Since a 
"paper farm" even if rightly worked out shows profits usually in excess 
of what can be obtained in actual practice, it is evident that those schemes 
which show a loss may be condemned at once, while those on the deadline 
had also better be discarded unless there are ways of reorganizing under 
a plan permitting more than average success. Therefore, as a general 
rule, by this kind of planning one can reduce his scheme down to a con- 
sideration of only those which indicate a possible paper profit. 

Indicates Reasons for Limitations. — Lastly, the trial test may prove 
a means of finding out the weak spot in the plan. It may be that 
prices asked are too high for the land, or that too much equipment is 
needed, or that the land is so far from market that transportation costs 
are prohibitive. 

Use of Financial Forecast Usually Worth While. — It is, therefore, very 
desirable to test out in this way any scheme whether it be large or small, 
contemplated or acquired, for crop production or animal industry. 

Actual Practice Likely to Vary from Paper Plans. — The financial 
forecast is, however, but a method of studying farm businesses — prospec- 
tive or actual. In actual practice a prearranged farming plan cannot be 
adhered to strictly. New influencing factors will occur, warranting 
changes from the preconceived plan. A subsequent change from crops 
to live stock, or in the type of crop or live stock farming, as from beans to 
wheat, or from dairying to sheep; a delay in operations because of labor 
troubles or late rains or heavy weed growth or accidents to men, work 
stock, or implements; unexpected occurrence of disease or insects; an 
unforeseen need for home production of stock feeds; a need to curtail 
expenses; an unlooked for rise in seed, feed, or supply prices; — these are 



302 FARM MANAGEMENT 

items that illustrate the limitations. The paper farm does, however, help 
a beginner to realize something of what he must look for in farming. It 
aids him to plan his future operations more intelligently. It assists him 
to discard the less profitable ventures. It offers a means of analyzing a 
going concern, to effect savings in overlapping enterprises, to stop 
gaps responsible for losses, to make adequate use of land, labor, and 
capital. 

Procedure in Making up a Financial Forecast 

The kind of information sought in drawing up a farm on paper will 
naturally determine the method of procedure. In any event a full 
description of the property and plan should precede any financial studies. 

Description of the Property. — The first step in drawing up a paper 
plan means getting a statement of the soil, typography, market, climatic, 
social, and other important conditions. To secure information to this 
end, full use should be made of local publications like those of boards of 
trade, chambers of commerce. State departments such as Commissions 
of Agriculture and State Experiment Stations, and of all federal publica- 
tions having a bearing upon the place in question, such as the Federal 
Farm Management surveys, the forestry reports, the U. S. D. A. Soil 
Surveys, and the U. S. D. A. Quadrangles. The initial statement should 
cover: 

1. The locality in general. 

2. The farm in particular according to the principles set forth in 
Chapter IV on "Selecting the Farm." 

The description will be illuminated and rendered more interesting 
if photographs and maps are incorporated. 

A good, clean-cut map of the property in mind should be drawn to as 
large a scale as possible and with clear indication of the various fence 
lines, ditch lines, buildings, soil types, and other factors of importance. 
It is well to exhibit contours and set down acreages. If the land has 
been in crops and the data can be secured, it would be well to show 
yields for as many years back as possible, with prices received and cost of 
production. 

This map is preferably drawn on the tracing paper from which Van 
Dyke negatives are made, from which in turn as many white prints can 
be run off as may be desired. This is a distinct advantage where it is 
planned to carry on the operations for several years, as copies can be 
made, one for each year, and all bound together, giving a history of the 
work of the farm from one year to another. 

The Plan of Work. — The proposed plan of conducting the farm should 
be written out in full. The mere act of visualizing the proposed business 
and mentally going over it step by step is good preliminary training for 
actual operations. If the farm jg a going concern, the present method of 



FINANCIAL FORECAST OF PROPOSED FARM PLANS 303 

handling should be described, together with observations covering present 
status and whether good or bad results are traceable to past handling. 
If overstocking has injured pastures, if neglect has caused a setback in 
orchard trees, if soil conditions have become bad, if stock is inbred, if 
soil erosion is occurring; these facts should be noted, and comments 
added covering recommendations for changes in existing methods. 

Where the business is a new one, as in developing bare land, all pos- 
sible types of farming should be considered, and the advantages and ob- 
jections carefully studied and weighed from the standpoints of personal 
desire, available capital, capacity of the farm, profitableness, home and 
speculative values. Much thought can well be spent investigating all 
possible enterprises and combinations of enterprises which appear prom- 
ising in developing the farm plan. 

Once the plan of campaign is decided upon, a detailed calendar of 
operations should be drawn up, to assist in estimating equipment needs 
and in checking conflicts or lapses in the farm work, to determine labor 
requirements, and to summarize for closer study. 

The Necessary Equipment. — The equipment should be looked into. 
In the case of an established business this means taking an inventory of 
what is on hand, with special investigation of its condition. To this list 
should be added a full statement setting forth the amount, kind, and 
quality of all additional necessary or desirable equipment. 

For new businesses, to be built up on bare land, the determination of 
equipment requires care in selecting only what is needed for the type of 
farming to be followed and in observing the limitations of capital, local 
custom, personal taste, and size of outfit. 

The determination of equipment needs should include: 

1. A complete list of all buildings and structures, number, type, size, 
construction, and materials. 

2. A full list of implements and machinery requirements, to care 
properly for crops, stock, and chores, and to insure proper upkeep of 
land, buildings, fences, water supply, and working equipment. 

3. A list of special equipment needed in the dairy, poultry plant, 
orchard, vegetable garden, or in producing or caring for special crops 
and stock products. 

The Financial Test. — Study of the financial side should be delayed 
until the conditions surrounding the property are well known, the plan of 
conducting the farm business carefully worked out, and the equipment 
needs fully determined. When these matters have been attended to, 
the time is ripe for the financial test. Several steps are involved, the 
order being that which makes for ease in studying rather than the natural 
incHnation to attempt an immediate answer of "What is this plan capable 
of making in the way of profit?" Much calculating is needed before the 
answer to this question can be given. 



304 FARM MANAGEMENT 

The calculations should include several important financial phases: 

1. Costs of Equipment. — A careful determination of the costs of the 
equipment. These cost data should be very complete as shown by cor- 
rectly made detailed computations based on prevailing prices. The cost 
of each building should be figured separately, so too the costs of work 
stock, tractor, or other motive power, the costs of all live stock other than 
work stock, the cost of each implement or item of machinery, the costs of 
special equipment carried out to include such things as brooms, pitch- 
forks, buckets, etc. Pipe for conveying water for domestic or stock 
uses, sewer pipe, and fencing are also to be included. 

2. Costs of Establishing the Business. — The cost of establishing the 
business is a determination of the period which must elapse when taking 
over a partly developed business or starting with bare land from the 
time of taking hold until the business has reached a point when the plans 
can be considered as fully matured. The time which must elapse 
varies with different businesses. With many annual field crops, the 
business can be fully established in a year's time. The same is often 
true of the range cattle business, with certain poultry plants, and in 
establishing a dairy on land already in crops. Alfalfa, on the other hand, 
requires 2 and sometimes 3 years before it can be safely turned over for 
pasture purposes; the planting of vineyards necessitates an interval of 
3 or 4 years, and of deciduous fruits 6, 7, 8 years or even more, before these 
types of farming may be considered as established. Other considerations 
also influence, such as the necessity of clearing or reclaiming land; of 
breeding up stock to obtain the desired number fully to equip the business; 
of making necessary improvements, such as road building, draining, 
protection from overflow, of increasing productivity, of removing alkali, 
of subduing hardpan. 

During this period of development, funds must be forthcoming for all 
the years to elapse before the business becomes self-sustaining, to 
meet charges for materials, labor, feed, taxes, insurance, living, personal 
expenseSj interest on mortgages or deferred payments, land payments 
falling due, repairs and parts, and operating incidentals. 

In taking hold of undeveloped land, allowance must be made for a 
period sufficient to erect buildings and fences, prepare for planting, buy 
equipment, and get things under way for a start at actual crop or stock 
production. 

3. Costs of the Established Business. — A determination of capital needs 
after the business is established involves items such as labor, feed, 
seed, fertilizer, sacks, boxes, twine, taxes, insurance, replacement of 
stock, rent of machinery, marketing costs, contract work — baling, 
threshing, cutting wood, constructing buildings — personal expenses, 
incidentals as axle grease, blacksmith coal, stock salt, stock medicines, 
etc., repairs and parts, upkeep of buildings, fences and other improvements. 



FINANCIAL FORECAST OF PROPOSED FARM PLANS 305 

4. Interest on the Investment. — If money is borrowed or if interest is 
demanded from the business for all capital invested, a determination is 
made of the amount based on the size of the investment at a fair rate 
of interest and the sum figured into the totals. 

If the study is designed to find out how far the business is capable 
of meeting all justifiable financial obligations, charges should be added 
to cover interest on moneys invested and replacement of capital reduced 
by depreciation. This part can be omitted if the test is to be confined 
to a determination of actual capital needs only. Sums, then, are included 
to cover immediate I'eplacements only. 

5. The Safety Factor. — As described in chapter on "Capital Require- 
ments," the safety factor should also be considered in connection with 
paper testing on farm plans, and a figure added to cover this item, if 
there are factors which can not be forecast with a reasonable degree of 
accuracy. 

6. Income Possibilities. — A determination of the income. The income 
possibilities should be worked out for both (a) the period from time of 
taking hold until the business is established, and (6) for average years 
after the business is fully under way. 

Usually the expenses exceed the receipts during periods of develop- 
ment, but whatever is available constitutes a sum which can be applied 
to the reduction of the total capital needs. 

Income should be carefully and conservatively figured, to cover 
both sales and exchanges, and differences in the inventory. The business 
should be credited with all it produces that has a selling value either 
immediate or later. 

Increase in the producing power of the land will be taken care of 
in crediting greater yields, whether this be due to improving fertility 
conditions, to growing trees, to establishing perennial crops, to pro- 
viding a better plant environment as by irrigation, drainage or, to reduc- 
tion of erosion, removal of alkali, protection from flooding, etc. The 
coats of this work, should of course appear in the estimates of expenses. 
For this reason indirect profits resulting from enhanced land values may 
be ignored. On the other hand, if the plan is a study of a proposed 
development scheme having sale of the property as the goal, the effect 
of the contemplated plan upon market prices and its ability to increase 
the selling value are of considerable moment. 

In figuring incomes, crops retained for seed purposes, or young 
stock for breeding or replacement purposes, are often deducted from the 
statement of possible sales. If this method is pursued, care should be 
exercised to relieve the account of corresponding expenses, or else a 
duplication will occur. 

When making a financial test covering the justification of the 
entire business, the safer, and more scientific way is to charge under 

20 



306 FARM MANAGEMENT 

expenses all the needs of the business — seed, feed, young stock, etc., 
at farm prices whether these are to be purchased or home raised, and to 
credit it under income with all it produces. Such a method brings out 
in a clear, concise way the totals involved in the conduct of the business 
and makes possible a study of the expenses and income producing 
possibilities of the different departments involved. 

When the determination is to be confined to an estimate of capital 
needs, the replacement feature can be handled by deducting from the out- 
put such feed, seed, stock, etc. as are needed for home use. 

7. Interest and Depreciation. — Items of interest and depreciation are to 
be handled for the period after the business is established in the same 
manner as described for the years of development. The same objects of 
study will also rule, i.e., to include all items if the study is to cover the 
entire business possibilities of the farming plans ; or else, if the test is to be 
one of determining actual capital needs, to ignore all but the sums act- 
ually required to keep the business going. 

Summing Up. — The next step consists in bringing together the various 
items for summing up the total and net investment requirements. This 
is figured from the expense items and possible income. With these data 
in completed form it is now possible to estimate the rate of returns upon 
the investment and to determine the actual producing value of the 
property. It is to this point that the previous work has all been tending. 

Reviewing the Test. — The last step is a review of the entire proposed 
plan, a weighing of the advantages and objections, and the making of a 
final decision as to whether or not the scheme is worth while. Here is 
included the increased market value of the plant resulting from the pro- 
posed activities. Here is consideration of alternative plans, as leasing 
out or selling. And now that the plan has been fully worked out, it 
should be subjected to rechecking and reconsideration. If the profit is 
unsatisfactory a change may be possible in equipment costs by substi- 
tuting cheaper equipment or by practicing greater economies in construct- 
ing buildings or in the plan of work, or by curtailing operating expenses, 
or by leasing in whole or in part instead of buying, or by developing better 
marketing plans. 

The paper testing of a farm has great possibilities, and, moreover is 
both interesting and instructive. 

Example of a Financial Forecast. — An example of the method of 
testing the financial side of a proposed farm business may perhaps be here 
inserted to advantage. It illustrates the need and scope of detail in 
testing proposed businesses and the procedure in testing financial pos- 
sibilities and capital needs of a selected business. 

Reverting to an Example Used Earlier. — Continuing with the 60-acre 
ranch, described as an example of how to estimate equipment (see pages 
202 to 206) a summary of costs figures out as shown below, 1915 data 
being used as representative of pre-war or normal times. 



FINANCIAL FORECAST OF PROPOSED FARM PLANS 307 

Net Cost of Establishing Business. Cost of Equipping. — The cost of equipping, 
including 

Land 40 acres $ 5 ,000 

20 acres 4,000 

$ 9,000 
Equipment (as shown in detail on pages 209 to 212) 5,537 

Totals $14,537 

Time of Taking Hold. — Time of taking hold is August 1, so as to have sufficient 
time to put up buildings and fences, put in ditch gates, check land, and have things 
in readiness to sow alfalfa seed and set out trees in February. Two horses to be 
bought at once, together with sufficient feed to keep these horses. Two extra horses 
are to be hired to haul building materials and to prepare land for planting. No live 
stock to be purchased until feed is ready. Other two horses not to be purchased 
until business is established. 

Figuring back from February 1, when land must be seeded, and assuming work days 
available as follows: 

January — 20 
December — 20 
November — 22 
October— 24 
September — 30 
must begin work of checking by August 15. 

Cost of Labor for Structures. — Roughly estimated, depending of course on 
the men, three men (carpenter and two helpers) should put up the buildings 
needed at once, i.e., dwelling, barn, and ditch gates, in 40 working days. At 
$4.50 for carpenter and $2.50 for helpers, this work will cost $360. The fencing 
and other buildings will be erected while the alfalfa is getting established — an 
extra man being hired to help on this work. The structures, other than dwell- 
ing and barn, will require additional help to the extent of $200, 80 days at $2.50 
per day — carpenter's helper — of which $25 is for ditch gate construction, $60 
on fences, $25 on fruit shed, $25 on sewer and piping, and balance on field 

shelters, hog pens and milk barn. Total for labor $560 

Cost of Rented Work Stock. — Considering hiring of extra stock and 4 horse scrap- 
er to do checking at 3^ acre per day — 120 days needed to check the acreage — two 

head of stock and harness at $1.00 and 25 i per day for scraper $270 

Cost of Surveying. — Surveying — two days at $8 16 

Cost of Horse Feed. — Feed for horses from August 1 to May 1 (when first hay 
cutting is made) : 

Owned stock at 20 lb. of hay, and 10 lb. barley, when working 
Hay— 240 days at 40 lb. = 5 ton at $10 = $50 

Barley— 150 days at 20 lb. =3,600 lb. at $26 = 39 (Includes 10 days haul- 

ing supplies and 20 

$89 days on intercrops) 
Hired stock 

40 lb. hay for 150 days = 3 ton at $10 = $30 (hired by month) 
20 lb. barley for 120 days = 2,400 lb. at $26 = 31 



Total feed for stock until haying time $150 

Stock is not to be placed on the alfalfa until it is 2 years old; or if planted in Feb- 
ruary, 1918, not to be pastured until April, 1920 — thus 32 months must elapse until 
business is fully established 



308 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Expenses During Period of Establishing. — Expenses to be provided during this 
time are: 

Living and salary of foreman 32 months at $110 $3,520.00 

Some barley for stock — say 500 lb. each annually, 1,000 lb. 

for 2 years, 2,000 lb. at $26 per ton 26 . 00 

Taxes, at 1 per cent of land value and improvements, $14,600 

for 32 months 388 . 00 

Blacksmith and repairs at $25 annually 60 . 00 

Alfalfa seed — 35 acres at $3 105 . 00 

Extra labor — during haying at $96 per year 192 . 00 

Baling alfalfa— 280 ton at $1.75 490. 00 

Insurance to be carried on buildings at 75^ per $100 for 

average of $1,500 for 2 years 15 . 00 

Water — 2 years at $2 per acre, $120 per year 240.00 

Incidentals at $50 per year — 32 months (axle grease, minor 

repairs, shop materials) 100. 00 

Office expense 30 . 00 

Total expense $ 6162.00 

Returns During Period of Establishing. 

From corn land (2 acres) and % of fruit land (12 acres) 
available for 2 years — can be used for tomatoes, beans, 
corn, sugar beets, or other high value crops; estimated 
returns above seed, material, and extra help to grow and 

sell crop at $35 per acre per year $ 980.00 

For hay — first season 100 tons 

second season 200 tons 

300 tons 
Less horse needs and reserves 20 (5 tons first year, 15 

tons second year) 

Available for sale 280 tons 

Worth $8 



$2,240 2,240.00 

Total receipts $3,220.00 

Net Needs During Period of Establishing. 

Labor (construction) $ 560 . 00 

Labor (haying) 192 . 00 

Horse hire 270 . 00 

Surveying 16 . 00 

Horse feed 176.00 

Living 3,520.00 

Taxes 388 . 00 

Blacksmith and repairs 60 . 00 

Seed 105.00 

Insurance 15 . 00 

Water 240. 00 

Baling 490.00 

Incidentals 100. 00 

Office expense 30.00 

Total needs 6,162.00 

Less returns 3,220.00 

OPERATING CAPITAL UNTIL ESTABLISHED $2,942.00 



FINANCIAL FORECAST OF PROPOSED FARM PLANS 309 

Operating Costs After the Business is Established. — Labor Needs 
(Determined from a calendar of operations) 
Outside of operator's work. 

General work— 480 man days at $2 S 960.00 

Fruit harvest 

Picking almonds at $40 a ton, 6 tons 240.00 

Picking up prunes at $6 per dry ton, 30 tons 180.00 

Total labor needs $1,380.00 

Horse Feed 

All hay raised 

Should feed some barley when haying, hauling, or doing 

heavy work. 
Extra work 
Hauling fruit 

Renovating alfalfa and corn land 
Haying — 506 10 hr. horse days, 10 lb. barley per head 

requires 2)4 tons at $25 $ 62.60 

Stock Feed. 
Dairy 

Fed 4 lb. concentrates for 300 days = 12,000 lbs. or 6 ton 

at average of $30 180. 00 

Barley $26. 00 

Beet pulp 26 . 00 

Bran 30.00 

Middlings. . ." 40.00 

Shorts 32.00 

Average $30.00 

Hogs 

Require at 2 per cent live weight for growing stock 325 lb. 

of grain, or for 100 pigs, 32,500 lb. at $1.00 325.00 

Feed for pigs to weaning age at $2.00 per litter, 20 litters 40. 00 

Feed for sows at }4 per cent, 400 lb. at ^2 per cent = 2 lb. 

X 365 = 730 lb. X 10 = 7,300 lb. at $1.00 73.00 

Feed for boar at 2 per cent on 500 lb. 10 lb. X 365 days = 

3,650 lb. at $1.00 36.00 

Total for Swine $474.00 

Sjeed, Fertilizer, etc. 

Cover crop seed for trees at $2 per acre 40. 00 

Seed for corn 2 acres at 25 ff 50 

Seed for renewing alfalfa — winter pastured by hogs 5 acres 

at .$3 15 . 00 

Vegetable seeds 5 . 00 

$60.50 

Irrigation water 60 acres at $2 120 . 00 

Sacks, twine, boxes, etc none 

Other material 

Salt, sulphur, dip ; $10. 00 

Spray 10.00 

$20.00 



310 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Taxes . $240 . 00 

Insurance. 

Only on buildings $22 . 50 

Replacement of Stock 

1 cow (no calves raised) 85 . 00 

Rent of Extra Machinery 

Silo cutter and engine at $3.00 for 2 days 6.00 

Cost of Marketing. 

Dues to almond association at l.lff per pound $132.00 

Cost of Contract Work. 

Baling 81 tons at $1.75 142.00 

Salary 720 . 00 

Office Expense 50 . 00 

Incidentals. — As axle grease, minor repairs, shop material, etc. 50.00 

Summary of Operating Needs 

Labor $1,380.00 

Horse feed 63 . 00 

Stock feed 654. 00 

Seed, etc....- 61.00 

Other material 20 . 00 

Irrigation water 120 . 00 

Taxes 240 . 00 

Insurance 23 . 00 

Replacement of stock 85 . 00 

Rent of extra machinery 6 . 00 

Cost of marketing 132 . 00 

Contract work 142 . 00 

Salary 720. 00 

Office expense. 50 . 00 

Incidentals * 50. 00 

Total $3,746.00 

Determining Income. — What income should be obtained from the dairy and how is 
it figured? 

Dairy. — Ten dairy cows, if fairly good, will give 20 lb. of 3.8 per cent milk for 
300 milking days, 6,000 lb. = 750 gal. Whole milk pays better than butterfat 
hence — 

Sale of milk $115.00 

Calf sold at $3 5 . 00 

Returns per cow $120.00 

or returns from herd $1 ,200. 00 

Sale 1 cow 40 . 00 

Returns from dairy $1 ,240. 00 

Sudne. — What is the basis of figuring and the gross returns from the swine? 
10 sows at 2 litters X 5 pigs = 100 pigs, less 2 gilts retained = 

98 pigs at 1801b. = 17,640 1b. at 8jf $1,311.00 

1 old sow sold 400 lb. at 5^ 20.00 

Total swine returns $1 ,331 . 00 



FINANCIAL FORECAST OF PROPOSED FARM PLANS 311 

Hay. — How much pasture is needed for the Uve stock? 
1 1 acres for cows and bull — April 1-December 1 
10 sows at 400 lb. = 4,000 lb. 
50 pigs at 180 lb. =9,000 lb. 

13,000 lb. at 1 ton per acre = 6M acres for sows. 
How many horses must be kept? Four. 
What will the hay needs be? 
Hay for dairy 

20 lb. per head (11 head) for 120 days = 13}i tons for dairy = 234 acres 
Hay for horses 

4 head at 20 lb. for 365 days = 15 tons = 2)4 acres 
or, a total alfalfa acreage of 225^ acres. 
Any hay for sale? 

Thirty-five acres in alfalfa and but 22}^^ acres needed, hence, 12^^ acres of 
hay for sale at 6 tons = 76}^ tons at $8 = 1612. 

Almonds. — What returns may be expected from 10 acres of almonds? 

1,200 lb. X 10 acres X 14ff = $1,480 
Prunes. — What returns may be expected from 10 acres of prunes? 

6,000 lb. X 10 acres X 4^ = $2,400 
Total Returns. — What total returns from the ranch? 

Almonds $1 ,480 

Prunes 2 ,400 

Dairy 1 ,240 

Hogs 1 ,331 

Alfalfa 612 

$7,063 

Net Income. — We are now in a position to determine the rate of interest payable 
on the total investment; the investment if interest is added at 6 per cent compounded 
annually for use of all moneys needed to bring the busmess to a self-supporting state; 
and lastly what can be paid for land if owner (a) is satisfied with 4 per cent, or (b) if 
he demands 10 per cent returns, presupposing that all other items remain the same, 
Investment. — The total investment when investment is taken with interest com- 
pounded amounts to: 

To equip $14,598 

To establish 2 ,942 

Total $17,540 

Gross income 7 , 063 

Operating expense 3 ,746 

Difference $3,317 

Depreciation. — Rate of depreciation to be charged: 

Land $ 

Buildings— $1,440 at 5 per cent 72 

Fences— 1446 at 5 per cent 23 

Workstock— $600 at 12 per cent 72 

*Dairy cows and bull 

*Poultry 

*Swine 

*Covered in replacement of stock and shown in income or operating expense. 



312 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Implements and machinery $809 at 10 per cent 81 

Miscellaneous equipment 

$460 at 10 per cent 46 

116 at 25 per cent 29 

Tools $107 at 10 per cent ' 11 

Trees (estimated cost $3,000 -^ 50 years' life) 60 

Total $394 

Rale of Interest on Investment. — $3,317 less $394 depreciation = $2,923 as interest 

on investment. This is nearly 17 per cent on investment, and if man is owner he 
also receives salary item. Based on no compounding of interest. 

Investment by Periods. — The investment by years is: 



Item 



(a) 



{h) 



(c) 



Land 

Buildings 

Fences 

Work stock 

Live stock 

Tools 

Fruit trees 

Ornamentals 

Miscellaneous equipment. . 
Implements and machinery 

Labor (construction ) 

Labor (haying) 

Surveying 

Stock feed 

Seed 

Water 

Taxes 

Blacksmith and repairs. . . . 

Insurance 

Hired stock 

Rental of machinery 

Contract work 

Office expenses 

Incidentals 

Salary 

Total 



9,100 
1,146 

95 
600 

25 
107 
385 

10 
219 
809 
410 

16 
150 
105 

96 
30 

270 



10 
50 

880 

$14,413 



$ 371 



75 
96 

13 

120 

146 

15 



245 

10 

25 

1,320 

$2,436 



$ 294 



1,180 



357 

75 
96 

13 

120 

146 

15 

15 



245 

10 

25 

1,320 

$3,911 



(a) Preliminary period, April 1- 
{h) April 1-April 1 (,12 month) 
(c) April 1- April 1 (12 month) 



-August 1 — (8 months) 



FINANCIAL FORECAST OF PROPOSED FARM PLANS 313 

(a) (b) (c) 

Totals $14,413 $2,436 $3,911 

Returns '. 1,250* 1,970** 

Actual cash needs $14,413 $1,186 $1,941 

Compounding Interest. 

Interest at 6 per cent for period (a) $ 576 

Investment beginning period (6) 14 ,989 

Capital needs for period (h) 1 , 186 

Investment end of period 16 , 175 

Interest at 6 per cent for period (fc) 971 

Investment beginning of period (c) 17, 146 

Capital needs for period (c) 1 , 941 

Interest at 6 per cent per period (c) 1 , 145 

Investment when established $ 20,232 

Land Values. 
(a) Since land represents $9,000 of $20,232, rest of investment is $11,232 
Interest at 4 per cent on this = $448 
$2,923 less $449 = $1,474 as interest on land 
$1,474 -^ 4 X 100 per cent = land worth $36,850, or $614 per acre with 

I mprovements. 
(6) Interest at 10 per cent on $11,232 = $1,123 

$2,923 less $1,123 = $1,800 interest on land, or at 10 per cent, land is 
worth $18,000 = $300 per acre. 
Note difference when borrowing capital vs. charging no interest for own capital 
i.e., costs $20,232 - 17,540 = $2,692 increase 

*From corn land and intercrops in orchard $ 490 

From hay land (100 tons less 5 tons horse needs) 95 tons at $8 760 

$1,250 . 

**From corn land and intercrops in orchard $ 490 

From hay land (200 tons less 15 tons horse feed and reserves) 

185 tons at $4 1 ,480 

$1,970 



CHAPTER Xy 
FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 

Farm management surveys are conducted along three general lines: 

(a) To provide a financial analysis of the year's business of selected 
farms. 

(b) To determine, from farmer's estimates, cost of production. 

(c) To obtain information regarding farm practices. 

Warren in a Cornell University publication has summed up in a clear and 
concise way the objects of agricultural surveys, the importance of knowing 
the normal, the facts that can be determined by studying farms, the relative 
costs of surveys, their limitations, and the order in which they should 
be done. In his summary a brief historical sketch of the development of 
statistical agricultural surveys is included. He also discusses the accu- 
racy of the survey method. As to methods, Warren points out the neces- 
sity of a definite object, the Hmiting of the scope of the survey, the 
complete filling of each record, and the general organization of the party 
and the conduct of its work. He ends with a study of the data them- 
selves. The bulletin is a well presented discussion of agricultural 
surveys.''^ 

Purposes of Farm Management Surveys. — More in detail, the pur- 
poses of these surveys — sometimes called "farm business analysis sur- 
veys" — are (a) to determine the fundamental factors which make some 
farms of an area more profitable than others — such factors as utilization 
of land area, sources of income, operating expenses, crop yields, and Hve 
stock production; (h) to determine the standards of operation for the 
farms of various types and sizes, such as the proper distribution of invest- 
ment, efl^ciency of man and horse labor, etc ; (c) to study the various forms 
of land tenure ; (d) to determine the yearly variations of profit on indivi- 
dual farms and on regional groups of farms; (e) to determine, as far as 
practicable, the effect of such factors as rainfall, market prices, crop 
yields live stock losses, etc., upon profits and upon the magnitude of the 
affected enterprises over a period of years. 

Method of Making Farm Management Surveys. — By the survey 
method, qualified investigators visit growers in selected districts, and, 
with blanks prepared previously, seek by questions to draw forth the 

314 



FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 315 

desired data. These are recorded as given, and later tabulated for the 
deducing of conclusions. In farm business analyses, investigators at- 
tempt to gather definite figures covering the previous year; in cost of 
production studies, the questioning aims to develop estimates of usual 
or normal costs and activities. 

Use of the Survey Method for Collecting Farm Management 
Data. — The survey method has been used extensively by the Office of 
Farm Management of the United States Department of Agriculture and 
by a number of state colleges. 

This type of investigation has been conducted throughout the country 
with marked uniformity. Its use has been brought about principally by 
the cooperative methods used by the Federal Office of Farm Management 
in furnishing colleges and other institutions with practically all the blanks, 
together with the publication in 1915, by the Office, oi Farmer's Bulletin 
661, "A Method of Analyzing the Farm Business." 

Its use can be defended on the grounds that it is a saver of costs and 
time, and that, if a sufficient number of records are taken, it is a reason- 
ably accurate index of existing conditions. 

A discussion of the accuracy of the survey data and deductions, with a 
justification of the survey method, is given by Spillman in a publication 
of the Office of Farm Management.''^ 

Personal Opinion Concerning Farm Management Surveys. — My own 
conclusions covering a rather complete study of farm management sur- 
veys is that the greatest value lies in furnishing information upon what is 
being done in given localities; they present a picture of agriculture in each 
community studied. Perhaps their greatest value lies in educating the 
investigator. And at that, a man to do farm management survey work 
must have had adequate farm contact and training to insure successful 
taking of records. The requirements include tact in dealing with far- 
mers, ability to draw out the necessary information, intelligence and in- 
dustry in filling out and interpreting findings. 

Much interpretation is needed, as the influence of war conditions, 
hail storms, labor, loss through epidemics, etc.; more interpretation than 
a layman can give. 

Farm management survey data provide valuable material for purely 
scientific analysis. They may be of small interest or value to the active 
farm manager, except as general rules or basic principles, yet the mere 
furnishing of data to the farm management surveyor may be a happy 
stimulus to the farmer. Question and answer compel him to make a 
mental review of his affairs; this often means a new perspective, perhaps 
for the first time a good look at his operations from a business point of 
view. A good illustration of this reaction upon farmers interviewed"'and 
their neighbors is found in the numbers whom the surveys have set to 
dcing something in the way of farm bookkeeping. 



316 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Single Year vs. Continuous Records. — Out of the experiences in con- 
ducting farm management surveys two lines of investigation have 
developed : 

1. An investigation which covers a study of farms for a single year. 

2. Studies of the same farm carried over a period of successive years. 
Experience shows that each of these types of study has its value, 

depending upon the information desired and the type of farming under 
consideration. 

Surveys Are Based on Farmers' Estimates. — Farm management 
surveys must be conducted with great care, and the results used with 
caution. Being a compilation of farmers' estimates, the possibility 
of error is greater than in industrial cost accounting studies. To insure 
reasonable accuracy, the individual farm records must be strictly con- 
fined to comparable farms, they must be taken by interviewers skilled 
in conducting examinations, and they must be carefully computed accord- 
ing to the best method of analyzing data. The survey method results 
in a presentation of estimates, and as such must rest on as extensive and 
substantial a foundation as possible. Estimates may be made over a wide 
range of subjects. They may consist of a determination of the year's 
sales, farm prices, and purchases, and from these more simple findings 
progress to estimates of actual productive man and horse labor, materials 
used in production, and to estimates of rates to cover machinery charges, 
pro rata of taxes, insurance and overhead items. 

Possible Objection to Method of Reporting Survey Data. — A possible 
objection may be registered in that farm managment surveys tend to 
reduce all investigations to terms of dollars and cents, ignoring, perhaps 
unfortunately, the personal element involved in farming operations. By 
the personal element is meant the general capacity of the operator, the 
tastes and wishes of the family, handicaps like ill health, wilfulness, dis- 
content, extravagance, penuriousness, and similar traits. 

Sample Forms Used in Farm Management Survey Work. — The scope 
of information obtainable, is, however, great. Examples of the kind of 
data obtained from farm management surveys can be gathered by a 
study of sample forms. 



FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 



317 




318 



FARM MANAGEMENT 










CAPITAL. 






Afo. 


__o 




OrtUTO. 


L.»,.LO.» 


Vu.™... 


FaI. BUIU^M .«» r.^io-T. 


OH COAHU 




R<«le.t.tov»Iue _. 









Curol; 


L.K«O.0 


Vd... 


clurp. 


V^„ 


Dq>MUlLM 




Onno Tilt Y 


tui- 


DwellM 










. 1 














net . .._ 











































„...| 



Dr«d 1,1 cowi. 

Br«e<) ol bull uaed.... 
Broed of sbecp.^.-^ 



Number pure-bred — 

Years used thia breed - 

Number pure-bred „^.. 



Occupation of tuidlord. .»»»..»«. 
Vu he ever m f ttnnerT.....-_ .„ . ^... .. ..^ 

Yeara farm hu bcea tenAnt«d 

Operator termed la what other SUteT... 
BeaeoTU tor ahiltlng _-..._.. 



of larmcr'a labor... - No. i 



Yevs farm Uborcr.. 

Ycmw tenant 

YcartOtt-ncr 






LANDLORD'S LIVE STOCK 



.Other hogs.. 

figi 

Chlckaaa.... 






MACHINERY. 



Heavy wagoM 

Wagos beds, racka, etc 

Llgbt wtgoas .... 

Pluasore wagon)....... 

Sleighs ...->....._.... 

Walking plow...... 

Sulky plow 

Disk hairaw.. ...._... 

Spike-tooth harrow 

Sprio^tooth hamw ... 

Roller 

Weeder 

Corn planter 

l-bone cultivator 

2 or 3 boiw coltivator.. 
Cora binder ... 



Hay fork asd stacker - 
Manure spreader...... 

Feed grinder ...... 

Com shredder 

Com aheller , 

Potato plaoter.' 

PoUto cutter 

Potato sprayer.. , 

Potato digger ....... 

Oithard spnyer,^.... 
Gasoline engines ».... 
Tread power i»,. ...._■ 

Wood saws™, 

WoA hanieoi. .«„.... 
Light hameBi 



Form 1. — (Continued). 



FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 



319 



1 

1 
1 

z 

I 

1 


1 
% 

S 

■5 
J 

CD 


1 

1 




1 
1 


J 
1 




1 


1 
o 

1 

5 


1 


1 

1 

1 
i 

E 


1 




E 

S 
■| 

s 

s 

J 

E 


! 

§ 

1 


i 
1 

i 
6 

E 

E 

1 

5 
1 
z 


s 

o 

1 

1 

z 


1 
1 

1 

1 

3; 


1 


1 
5 

1 

E 

1 


E 

i 

i 


E 
O 


c5 


1 

1 
1 


o 


j 


















1 

1 
1 


3 

i 
1 

E 


1 

1 
1 


1 

1 
1 

1 
1 

£ 
z 


s 


i 
1 


i 

a 


1 

1 
1 


j 
i 

i 
1 

1 


2 
t 

S 


i 


1 
1 






\ 


















f 


















3 


















^ 


















! 


1 


1 


1 

1 

a 

X 


1 


1 


^f 




1 


z 
z 


1 






































































1 

I 

z 
o 

> 


1 














z 

5 
a 

5 
1 










1 
k 






































































1 
i 






















E 








































































1 


1 


i 




1 


? 

K 


z 


z 


H 


1 




i 
J 

JS 

1 
1 


i 

1 
1 


1 
1 

1 


1 

1 
1 




i 
~ 

1 


1 
o 


1 


J 


1 

I 

1 


E 

1 

I 


1 


1 


1 


^ 




J 
I 


j 


J 


1 


E 


i 
i 

1 


1 


J 


w 


1 

1 
1 


1 

E 


i 


1 

.3 


s 


K 


s 




O 














E , „■ 


^ 




1 






s 1 ^ 


- 


i S s 


■^ 










-o = 




JS Z 


c 








ill 














5 1 £ S. 








II .3 5 




i" 


e 












< 




o 


■^ 








- 


^ 


f 


? -o 




8 e 

* 2 


a 


1 ^^! 


i 










A i i 


£ 




? 


1 1 s 1 . 




^IIIJI 


J 
P 



6 

o 

g 


1 


























>- 


1 










i 

1 
















T 


1 
a. 

o 


























^ 1 
















Is 

1' 


1 




1 
























h- 








1 


i 

E 
























1 
















1 


i 


1 

1 

> 


1 1- 1 ; 

J J 3 




1 


E 
1 


i 
1 
i 


1 


1 


i 


1 
1 


I 


I 






1 " 

a: 
































< 


1 
J 














o 

z 

i u 

ll 

1 


1 


















3 


2 1 

in H 
E 


j 














o 


















5 


1 






















I 


















■* > 


J 
















f 

If 


1 
1 
1 


f 
2 


i 
t 

1 


1 


1 


i 

1 
1 


1 

i 


• 
a 


! 




1 
























1 
1 


1 

s 

■J 


1 
s 


i 


E 
S 

3 


< 

o 




3 


.1 
i 


1 


J 


1 

i 

j 


1 
E 






i 1 s 


i 



^ 




Cti 




73 


<1 


fli 




f^H 


« 


a 


02 


s 


P 








>> 


a 


-u 


<u 


t! 




HI 


t-^ 


rn 


to 


3 


c 


OJ 




(3 
O 


(U 


m 


73 

pi 


^ 


O 


H 


U 




^_ 


CO 


o 


01 


tj-H 


T3 


-U 


d 


0) 




0) 


r/i 


^ 




CO 





a 

eS 



320 



FARM MANAGEMENT 






O - 



FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 



321 



'^ 


cl 


< n 


03 


a; 


Xi 


^Sc^ 


> 0) 






c 


n 




< (rt 




5S 






o 


'S 


03 


1 ^ 

cr! 


Ph 


<U^ 


-T3 




C 


} ° 


03 


1 «^ 


d 




O 


5^ 


-u 


JO 


03 








C 




03 


<. 


bl) 



J bC 

1 -s 



fe 



O o 



2 c 



-a 

-a 



io <t; 



oqO 






t, 




<u 






J3 


3 


fcs 


tw 





^^ 




e -^ =^ "^ 
















" m " 

5S| 




1 




Mm 









Lambs 
raised 




1) 




Other 
stock 
and 
beef 
calves 




'S 




Is 

d2 








■5 ^ 

rf 

Q " 




Colts 
raised 








II 




13 

a 

'S 
"0 

13 

a 

i5 


1 


> 





^ 



^^ 












a; a> 



-2 °^"3 

o o ^1 









^_^ 








n a; 




■^ 




'i( oj 








>H 








tt ra Qj Q 



21 



322 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



a CO 


ca 
0. 










Man 

hours 

per acre 




"3 o 




6 ^ 




<u 

n 


Eh 




a 




0) 

a a 
o 


i 


- 




a 

1^ 












Yield, 
bushels 




1^2 

a"ss 
1 ' 




2 

0. 
3 




o 

a 

2 
2 




c 

C 
'5 

6 
3 

o 

-o 

-c 


c 
'3 

oi 

X 
n 


J3 

J= 

T3 

C 
cj 

(D 

V 
> 

•a 
-o 

0) 

c 
IS 
E 
o 



a c3 

2a 
o 



o 2 
03 S 



H oj 



2 3 C p 53 H 



.2S £ go 



_^ 




4) 


Tt 




n 




<U 










ti 


3 

c 


>> 

03 

T3 


3 




„ 








^ 














« 






T3 
si 


^ 






OJ 
















a 








03 








•a 


« 






« 


3 
3 






a 








03 


a 





« a 



.2 s 



^ ® 

S^ 
p^s 



sa 
< 2 



o 




ti w<;;3t>!n 



FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 

Horse Labor Charges 



323 



Item of cost 



Quantity per horse 



Price 



Expense per item 



Grain 

Hay 

Pasture 

Interest . . . . 
Depreciation. 
Shoeing 



Hours per year horse work. 
Co_t per hour 



times 



per cwt. 
per cv/t. 
per mo. 
per cent 
per cent 
each 

I Total expenses 

Hours 
Cents 



Man L.iBOR Charges 



Kind of labor • 


Number 


Days 
em- 
ployed 


Hours 
per 
day 


Cash wages 


Board and 
perquisites 


Wage 
per 




Day Month 


Day 


Month 


hour 




























General day labor hired 

Operator labor 

Family labor unpaid 

Supervision 





Quantity and Price of Material per Acre 




Item 


Quantity 
per acre 


Price 


Per cent 
charged 
to wheat 


Cost per 
acre 


Seed 






















Green manure (include cost of seed, fitting 
and planting) 




Chemicals 

Fuel 









Insurance 



Kind of insurance 



Basis of charge 



Bushels per 
acre 



Dollars per 
acre 



Rate, 
per cent 



Charge 
per acre 



Hail 

Fire. . . . 
Tornado 



Credits 




Item 




Quantity 


Value per acre 


Straw 


lb. per acre 
acres per A. U. 




Pasture 





Form 3. — {Continued). 



324 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Use of Implements 





Number 


Size 


Cost 
new 


Cost to wheat 


Per cent 
annual 
charge for 
interest, 
repairs, 
oils, de- 
preciation 


Annual 




Per 
cent 


Amount 


charge 
to wheat 


Binder 
















Combine ; 

Disk harrow 

Sulky plow 












Rake 




Road wagon 

Low truck wagon 




Drill 
































Roller 




Tractor 




Truck 
























Total 









Form 3. — (Continued). 



FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 



•325 




Con OF Imimuio-C 


>:>. 






No - _ 9 




.». 






OFIBATIOKB- 




B>M 


eon. 


































































































. ._|. 














Dnirr EiriNii. oni 


»nuM 


Umi (n 


ouut); 












uomnosD. 


"s-r- 


TMlMt. 








DbU. 


AbhhM- 


p«»« 




f. 
















" 












— 
















FirtlHifT 














„ 
































































Common ttotuo 
















































n rM) 














n-. 
































































- 
















Pnlsht UXt lUHM 




































































































_ 




— _ 












10 


IB 


10 


IB 


10 






































































PricflMhirvcrtlimo perbbL 












Prl teceJ edt »tora* 1 












Ap.™,f.t-,[<(ri«,^ 












PH« i ^ 










lm™,ntM,-H=,npp|t, 












p . ^ ^ 




































Tot Co«« 






TOTU. 


Pd Adi. 


PuBlBUU 


1 h^ M 
































































OT,«Tf 

























•P«T.. 








^>--ii.. 








NbCow 

















Suriue— Hltly, roUiog, level. 

Fertilizer »Bdy«i»-S PA ■- 

Dl*iUc« trom MDtumlcg mukot 



Form 4.— Example of Enterprise Survey Blank Form. Field Sheets Used by 
U. S. D. A. in Determining Costs of Apple Production. 



320 FARM MANAGEMENT 

List of Farm Management Surveys 

Farm management surveys are being conducted by many states and 
by the United States Department of Agriculture, working in cooperation 
and seperately. New publications are constantly appearing so that an 
exhaustive list is not possible. From the score or more surveys, the 
results of which have been published, the following selections will show 
the scope of the findings and the data in completed form for use in a 
given locality. The list is fairly indicative of what is now available. 
It is arranged in order of dates of publishing. 

1. Federal Farm Surveys, — In 1909 the New Hampshire Agricultural 
College and the Office of Farm Management of the United States Depart- 
ment of Agriculture, then in the Bureau of Plant Industry, conducted a 
careful study of the equipment, expenses and incomes of 266 farms in the 
townships of Amherst, Hollis, Lyndeboro, and Milford, a group of four 
townships in the southern part of Hillsboro County, New Hampshire. 
The purpose of the survey was to determine the relative condition of the 
farms in the region, the prevailing types of farming, and their relative 
profitableness. The results were published by E. H. Thomson as Circular 
75 of the United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant 
Industry, issued March 16, 1911. No one type of farming was found 
to predominate in the region, although fruit growing, poultry raising, 
and dairying are rather widely practised. 

2. A survey to determine the profits that farmers receive in irrigated 
districts and to analyze the farm business as to the factors affecting 
incomes was conducted in the Utah Lake Valley of Utah. Records 
were taken covering the crop year of 1913 from 118 farms, small in area, 
and intensively farmed. Sugar beets and fruit' are the most important 
crops in connection with general farming, dairying, and poultry produc- 
tion. The findings were published as U. S. Department of Argiculture 
Bulletin 117, contribution from the Bureau of Plant Industry, E. H. 
Thomson and H. M. Dixon, joint authors, dated July 24, 1914. 

3. A survey of three representative areas in Indiana, Illinois, and 
Iowa to determine profits and the factors controlling income was conducted 
in 1911. Records were obtained from about 700 farms in Clinton and 
Tipton Counties, Indiana; Cass and Menard Counties, Illinois; and 
Guthrie and Greene Counties, Iowa, where the agriculture largely consists 
of corn, oats, wheat, hay, and clover seed. The results were published 
as Bulletin 41 of the United States Department of Agriculture, con- 
tribution from the Bureau of Plant Industry, dated January 14, 1914, 
E. H. Thomson and H. M. Dixon, authors dated July 24, 1914. 

4. A survey taken during 1911-12 in Chester County, Pennsylvania, 
had for its objects the working out of a method of studying regional 
farm management problems, the discovering of fundamental principles of 



FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 327 

farm management, and a trial application of these principles to a definite 
agricultural region. Records were taken from 643 farms in an old and 
prosperous agricultural region growing cereals, potatoes, and fruit, and 
producing dairy and poultry products. The findings were contributed 
as a Professional Paper from the Office of Farm Management, and were 
published as Bulletin 341 of the United States Department of Agriculture, 
Oflfice of the Secretary, under date of January 17, 1916. W. J. Spillman, 
J. M. Dixon, and G. A. Billings are the joint authoi's. 

5. A survey of the muck land farms of northern Indiana and southern 
Michigan was conducted in 1914-15 to study their organization, the 
most profitable practices, intensive and extensive methods of handling, 
and methods of utilizing unimproved lands of this type. Records were 
secured from 140 farms growing celery, onions, cabbage, potatoes, and 
peppermint as intensive crops, or else practicing extensive farming with 
corn, oats, wheat, with some cattle and hogs. The results were published 
October 10, 1916 by the United States Department of Agriculture as 
Farmer's Bulletin 761 from the Office of Farm Management, Office of 
the Secretary, H. R. Smalley, author. 

6. A survey of the cut-over timber lands of northern Wisconsin, 
Michigan, and Minnesota, covering 801 farms, was carried on in 1915 to 
determine the most profitable farm practices and factors essential to the 
development of the region. The type of farming was found to be not 
definitely established, corn, hay, and oats being the predominating 
crops together with some dairying, hog raising, and highly specialized 
mixed farming. The results appeared as Bulletin 425, from the Office 
of Farm Management, Office of the Secretary, United States Department 
of Agriculture. Published October 24, 1916, J. C. McDowell and W. B. 
Walker, authors. 

7. In 1913, 534 farms of Sumter County in central Georgia were 
surveyed to bring out the economic significance of such factors as 
tenure, size of farm, farm organization, crop yield, and cost of cotton 
production. The area is devoted approximately one-third to cotton, 
one-third to pasture and miscellaneous crops, one-third to uncleared 
timber. The results are given in a Professional Paper, Bulletiii 492 of 
the United States Department of Agriculture, OflSce of Farm Manage- 
ment, Office of the Secretary, published February 10, 1917, H. M. Dixon 
and H. W. Hawthorne, authors. 

8. Farming in the bluegrass region of Kentucky as represented by 
Mason, Scott, and Madison Counties constituted the basis of study of 
organization and management of 178 Kentucky farms. The area pro- 
duces principally live stock, tobacco, corn, wheat, and hemp. The study 
comprises the United States Department of Agriculture Bulletin 482, 
Office of the Secretary, Office of Farm Management, published Feb- 
ruary 19, 1917, J. H. Arnold and Frank Montgomery, authors. 



328 FARM MANAGEMENT 

9. A survey conducted in 1914 covering 104 farms in the Provo 
area of the Utah Lake Valley in Utah repeated a previous study in this 
section (see No. 2 listed above) to check the results of the first survey. 
The findings appeared as United States Department of Agriculture 
Bulletin 582, from the Office of Farm Management, Office of the Secre- 
tary, under date of January 7, 1918, L. G. Connor, author. 

10. Factors of successful farming as practised near Monett, Missouri, 
were made the object of a survey of 274 farms during 1915 in the Ozark 
district in the southwestern part of the state. Very few stock or poultry 
farms were found, the chief crops being wheat, corn, oats, hay, and 
apples and small fruits. The study aims to analyze the farm businesses 
as collected and show the factors of successful farming. The findings are 
embodied in the United States Department of Agriculture Bulletin 633, 
Office of Farm Management, Office of the Secretary, W. J. Spillman, 
author, dated February 25, 1918. 

11. The irrigated districts of the Lower Rio Grande in the State 
of Texas received attention in 1914-15, the status of farming being 
investigated on 59 farms. Truck, specialized crops as strawberries 
and sugar cane, staple crops as corn, alfalfa, sorghums, and stock beets 
with some dairying and hogs, prevail. The findings were published April 
29, 1918 as Bulletin 665 of the United States Department of Agriculture, 
Office of Farm Management, Office of the Secretary Rex E. Willard, 
author. 

12. In 1914 a survey was conducted in Brooks County, Georgia, on 
106 farms to ascertain the most satisfactory type of farming under 
normal conditions of such factors as crop yields, organization, labor 
conditions. Corn, peanuts, cotton, oats, potatoes and truck with some 
hog raising and cattle, are included in the farming practices of the com- 
munity. The data are available as United States Department of Agricul- 
ture Bulletin 648, Office of Farm Management, Office of the Secretary, 
published May 1, 1918, E. S. Haskell, author. 

13. In 1914 a combined farm management and cost determination 
survey was conducted on 112 farms of Williamstown, Belton, Broadway 
and Honeapath townships in Anderson County, South Carolina, to 
determine the degree of success in a community of raising cotton as the 
chief crop but also producing corn, oats and wheat, with very little 
live-stock. The findings appear as United States Department of Agricul- 
ture Bulletin 651, Office of Farm Management, Office of the Secretary, 
published May 8, 1918, A. G. Smith, author. 

14. A survey of 627 irrigated farms in southern Arizona undertook 
to determine the factors of business management and farm practice 
making for financial success. The survey was probably conducted in 
1916, although the date does not specifically appear in the publication. 
A large portion of the area surveyed — Yuma, Salt River Valley, and Gila 



FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 329 

Valley — is devoted to dairying and alfalfa, while the fattening of cattle, 
and the production of cotton, grain, fruit, poultry, and truck are also 
practised. The material collected was published under date of June 14, 
1918, as United States Department of Agriculture Bulletin, 654, Office of 
Farm Management, Office of the Secretary, R. W. Clothier author. 

15. A study of 120 farms of Ellis County, Texas was conducted in 1914 
by the survey method, to gain data on farms almost entirely given over 
to the growing of cotton. The findings appeared as United States 
Department of Agriculture Bulletin 659, Office of Farm Management, 
Office of the Secretary, under date of June 17, 1918, with Rex E. Willard 
as author. 

16. A study of 300 owner and 153 tenant farms was made in Lenawee 
County, Michigan, to determine successful farming methods and factors 
affecting profits in this portion of the Corn Belt Farming practices 
tend toward diversified farming on medium-sized farms. Hay and other 
field crops are the leading crops although there is an increasing tendency 
toward dairying and hog raising. The survey was probably made in 191 1, 
the exact date not being given. The findings were published July 24, 
1918, by the United States Department of Agriculture as Bulletin 694 
from the Office of Farm Management, Office of the Secretary, H. M. 
Dixon and J. A. Drake, authors. 

17. A survey of 212 farms in Marion and Polk Counties, Oregon, 
based upon the business year of 1912, presents some of the important 
factors influencing farm profits in this area on both the Valley silt and 
the Red Clay hill farms. Oats, wheat, dairy cattle, horses, poultry, and 
sheep are raised, but live stock tends to be a sideline to cash crop farming. 
The results, published July 27, 1918, by the United States Department of 
Agriculture, appeared as Bulletin 705, Office of Farm Management, Office 
of the Secretary, Byron Hunter and S. O. Jayne, authors. 

18. A 5-year survey in Palmer Township, Washington County, 
Ohio, was planned to ascertain the types and profits of farms in a long 
established community where land prices are low and shipping facilities 
poor; the effect of size and quality of farm business upon economic organi- 
zation; the most successful farm practices; the value of the single year 
farm survey; changes in practice over a 5-year period; and amount and 
effect of yearly variations of such factors as crop yields and expenses. 
Mixed farming prevailed on the 73 farms surveyed, with corn, wheat, 
hay, beef, cattle, sheep, and poultry predominating. A report covering 
the years 1912-1916 inclusive was published under date of September 26, 
1918, by the United States Department of Agriculture Professional 
Paper 716, from the Office of Farm Management, Office of the Secretary, 
H. W. Hawthorne, author. 

19. In 1915, 342 farms in southwestern Kentucky were studied to 
find out the factors making for successful farming. Prevailing types of 



330 FARM MANAGEMENT 

farming were wheat, tobacco, and general live stock production. The 
report groups the farms into five types, and appeared as Professional 
Paper 713, of the United States Department of Agriculture dated October 
9, 1918, being a contribution by J. H. Arnold of the Office of Farm 
Management, Office of the Secretary. 

20. Records of 422 farms to be analyzed for information relative to 
farm organization, crop production, and profits, were collected for the 
farm year 1916 from an area in western Pennsylvania considered typical 
of western Pennsylvania, southwestern New York, eastern Ohio, and parts 
of West Virginia. General live stock and crop farming, giving way to 
dairying, comprised the type of business. The results appeared as 
Bulletin 853, Office of the Secretary, Office of Farm Management under 
date of July 20, 1920, and written by Earl D. Strait and H. M. Dixon. 

State Surveys 

21. Records of 983 farms in the townships of Ithaca, Dryden, Danby, 
and Lansing in Tompkins County, Central New York were collected in 
1908, to find out individual farm profits and the factors determining 
profit. General crops, or general farming combined with livestock pre- 
vailed. The survey was conducted by the Department of Farm Manage- 
ment, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, and the findings published 
March, 1911 as Bulletin 295, G. F. Warren and K. C. Livermore, authors. 

22. The results of a survey in 1912 of 50 farms in the Gallatin 
Valley, Montana to determine factors of successful farming are available 
in Bulletin 97 of the Montana Agricultural College, Bozeman, Montana, 
published February, 1914, with E. L. Currier as author. 

23. Six hundred sixty-nine farms in the townships of Jackson, 
Kingsville, Madison and Centerview, of Johnson County, Missouri, were 
made the basis of a study in 1912 to determine capital requirements, 
receipts and expenses, cropping systems, land tenure, and other business 
factors of farm organization. Wheat, corn, and pasture predominated, 
while live stock included hogs, beef, and dairy cattle. The findings with 
reference to land tenure are available as Bulletin 121 of the University 
of Missouri, put out December, 1914, O. R. Johnson and W. E. Foord, 
authors. 

24. Records of 2,743 farms in various counties, as Tompkins, Livings- 
ton, and Jefferson in different parts of New York State were collected 
during a period extending over 8 years prior to 1914. General farming 
and dairying are practised almost exclusively. The findings appeared 
July, 1914 as Bulletin 349, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, from 
the Department of Farm Management, G. F. Warren, author. 

25. In 1912 a study of 668 farms in the western part of Johnson 
County, Missouri, was made to determine the relationship between size 
of farm, amount of capital, crop yields, productive labor and profits. 



FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 331 

Corn, wheat, and hay are the chief crops, while poultry, cattle and hogs 
are produced. The findings were published as Bulletin 410, April, 1916, 
by the University of Missouri, 0. R. Johnson and W. E, Foord, authors. 

26. One-hundred eighty-six records were secured in the irrigated dis- 
tricts of the Gallatin Valley, Montana, for the fiscal year beginning April 
1, 1913, to study the relationship between the different elements of farm 
business. Field crops, as peas, oats, wheat, barley, clover, hay, alfalfa 
hay, and timothy hay, were grown to a variable extent. The results of 
the survey were made available in Bulletin 1 1 1 of the University of Mon- 
tana published October, 1916, with E. L. Currier as author. 

27. A survey to determine the controlling factors of efficient farm 
management was conducted in Platte Valley in 1911, Merrick County 
in 1912, Madison County in 1913, Richardson County in 1914, Nebraska. 
One hundred ninety-five farms raising wheat, corn, oats, hogs, cattle 
and poultry were studied. The results were published October 15, 1916, 
as Bulletin 157 of the University of Nebraska, H. C. Filley, author. 

28. A survey in 1912 of Bridgewater, Wheeling, Walcott, and Cameron 
City Townships in Rice County, Southeastern Minnesota, covered 400 
farms. The study was conducted to find out what profits the farmers 
were making, to determine factors influencing and limiting these 
profits, and to obtain data for concrete suggestions to the farmers of the 
region. The important crops of the district are wheat, oats, barley, flax 
and corn. Live stock raising is well developed, cattle and hogs predomi- 
nating. The findings were published as Bulletin 172 of the University 
of Minnesota, October, 1917, Andrew Boss, A. H. Benton, and W. L. 
Cavert, joint authors. 

29. Records of 367 farm businesses were taken by the survey method 
during 1914 in seven irrigated areas of Utah where hay and forage were 
the leading crops with wheat, oats, barley, potatoes, sugar beets, following 
in the order given. Live stock includes beef, sheep, dairy cows, horses, 
swine, and poultry. The results were published September, 1917, as 
Bulletin 160 of the Utah Agricultural College, E. B. Brossar, author. 

30. An investigation of 284 general farms and 75 dairy farms in Mon- 
mouth County, New Jersey, to determine the amount of farm profits and 
factors affecting them, was conducted during 1914. The principal crops 
of the region are corn, hay, rye, potatoes, with some wheat, fruit, and 
truck. The findings were published January 15, 1917 as Bulletin 312 oi 
the New Jersey Agricultural College, Frank App, author. 

Farm Practice Surveys 

Farm practice surveys undertaken to study methods of farm practice 
in given localities and for given crops have been carried out by both the 
Federal Office of Farm Management and the Farm Management Depart- 



332 FARM MANAGEMENT 

ments of State Universities. A brief list of typical surveys of this nature 
appear below. 

31. Studies of Sugar Beet Farms. — A survey of three sugar beet 
districts — Provo in Utah County, Utah, Garland in Boxelder County, 
Utah, and Idaho Falls, Bonneville County, Idaho, was carried on in 1914 
and 1915. The object of the study was two-fold — (a) to study farm 
practices, and (h) to determine total costs of production. One hundred 
seventy-three farms were studied, nearly all growing sugar beets, grain 
and potatoes. In some cases beets were grown on the same field for 
18 years; in many cases beets were grown from 3 to 7 years without 
rotation. The findings appeared as Bulletin 693, July 16, 1918, of the 
United States Department of Agriculture, joint contribution from the 
Office of Farm Management and Bureau of Plant Industry, with L. A. 
Moorehouse of the Office of Farm Management and James W. Jones of 
the Bureau of Plant Industry as joint authors. 

32. In 1914 and 1915 a survey was made in the Greeley, Fort Morgan, 
and Rocky Ford Districts of Colorado, for the purpose of finding out 
the factors controlling field practice and related costs. The area is 
mostly devoted to sugar beets; although other crops used in rotation are: 
alfalfa, cantaloupes, potatoes, beans, and grain. The data are based on 
371 farm surveys, and were published December 14, 1918, as Bulletin 
726 by the United States Department of Agriculture as a joint contribu- 
tion from the Office of Farm Management and the Bureau of Plant Indus- 
try, with L. A. Moorehouse, R. S. Washburn, and T. A. Summers of the 
Office of Farm Management and S. B. Nichols of the Office of Sugar Plant 
Investigations, Bureau of Plant Industry, as joint authors. 

33. Three hundred twenty records were taken from farms in the 
vicinity of Caro, Alma, and Grand Rapids, Michigan and from north- 
western Ohio during the crop seasons of 1914 and 1915. The study was 
made to ascertain the field practices employed and to determine the 
relationship of these operations to the cost of growing the crop. Sugar 
beets are the chief crop, with clover, corn, and grain used in rotation. 
The findings were published as Bulletin 748, January 28, 1919, from the 
Office of Farm Management, Office of the Secretary and the Bureau of 
Plant Industry with R. S. Washburn, L. A« Moorehouse, and T. H. 
Summers of the Office of Farm Management and C. O. Townsend of the 
Office of Sugar Plant Investigation of the Bureau of Plant Industry, as 
authors. 

34. United States Department of Agriculture Bulletin 760, Office of the 
Secretary, contributed jointly by T. H. Sumners, L. A. Moorehouse, and 
R. S. Washburn of the Office of Farm Management and C. 0. Townsend 
of the Bureau of Plant Industry, comprises the fourth in the federal 
sugar beet growing series. The publication reviews the findings of 165 
farm records taken during 1915 and 1916 from four typical sugar beet 



FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEYS 333 

areas of California in Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, and Monterey 
Counties. The data show farm practice and the cost of producing 
the crop. 

Studies of Apple Orchards. — Five Bulletins from the Federal Office of 
Farm Management, United States Department of Agriculture, present 
the farm practices in apple growing for selected districts of the United 
States. These are: 

35. Bulletin 466, dated January 10, 1917, by G. H. Miller and S. 
M. Thomson, being a study, made in 1914, of the current cost factors 
involved in the maintenance and handling of orchards and the handling of 
the crop in Wenatchee Valley, Washington. 

36. Bulletin 500, dated March 14, 1917, by the same authors, covers 
a similar detailed study, made in 1914-15, of 125 farms in the fruit 
regions of Mesa, Delta, and Montrose Counties in western Colorado. 

37. Bulletin 518, dated March 17, 1917, by the same authors, covers a 
detailed study, made in 1915, of 54 farms in the Hood River Valley, 
Oregon. 

38. Bulletin 614, dated April 20, 1918, by the same authors, covers a 
detailed study, made in 1915, of 120 repesentative bearing orchards in 
the Yakima Valley, Washington. 

39. Bulletin 636, dated May 10, 1918, by the same authors, covers a 
detailed study, made in 1915, of 38 representative bearing orchards in the 
Payette Valley, Idaho. 

40. The cost of producing apples in five counties in western New York 
for the period 1910-15, written by G. H. Miller, appeared as U. S. D. A. 
Bulletin 851 Office of the Secretary, Office of Farm Management, under 
date of July 30, 1920. Results are reported of 2 18 apple growers producing 
fruit in conjunction with field crops. The study treats of the relation of 
the orchard to other enterprises, of orchard practices, effect of practice 
upon yields, returns obtained, and cost of maintaining orchards. 

41. Studies of Potato Farms. — A survey of 370 potato farms in Mon- 
mouth County, New Jersey, to determine the factors affecting profits 
was conducted in 1914 and published April 20, 1916 by the New Jersey 
Agricultural College as Bulletin 294, Frank App, author. 

42. Studies of Poultry Farms, — Survey records of 1 50 poultry farms in 
Cumberland County and the northwestern part of Sussex County, New 
Jersey, were taken between November 1, 1915 and November 1, 1916, to 
determine the profits and the factors affecting the profits of poultry 
raisers.- The results constitute an 88-page Bulletin 329 of the New Jersey 
Agricultural College, published March 15, 1918, with Frank App, Allen 
G. Waller and Harry R. Lewis as authors. 

43. Studies of Dairy Farms. — A survey of 460 farms, almost 
exclusively devoted to dairying and the production of forage crops, was 
made in Sussex County, New Jersey, during 1914, to determine farm 



334 FARM MANAGEMENT 

profits and the factors affecting them. The data and conclusions were 
published by the New Jersey Agricultural College, July 1, 1917 as Bul- 
letin 320, Frank App, author. 

44. An investigation of the economic side of dairying as carried on in 
Shelby, Spencer, Oldham and Hardin Counties, on 162 farms within 
about 40 miles of Louisville, Kentucky, was made in 1916 and 1917. In 
addition to dairying and the production of farage crops, a few farms 
reported sheep, hogs, beef cattle, corn, wheat, tobacco and clover. The 
findings were published under date of July, 1918 as Bulletin 217 of the 
University of Kentucky, with W. D. Nicholls and J. B. Hutson, authors. 

45. Studies of Cotton Cultivation. — Practice in the cultivation of 
cotton, as shown by data collected from 19 areas in Missouri, North 
Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Texas, Okla- 
homa, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and consisting of at least 25 records 
from each area, is presented in tabular form in U. S. D. A. Professional 
Paper 511, joint contribution from the Bureau of Plant Industry and the 
Office of Farm Management, written by H. R. Cates and published under 
date of March 31, 1917. 

46. Studies of cotton production costs based on estimates from 842 
farms in ten cotton districts, 3 in Alabama, 3 in Georgia 2 in South 
Carolina and 2 in Texas, are reported in U. S. D. A. Bulletin 896, from 
the Office of Farm Management and Farm Economies, dated November 
19, 1919. L. A. Moorhouse and M. R. Cooper, authors. 



PART II 
INTRODUCTION TO PART II 

Reference to the table of contents of this book will reveal its division 
into two parts. Part I deals with certain considerations to be taken up 
before one embarks upon actual farming as owner, tenant, or employee. 
It covers the scope and place of farm management, the selecting of farming 
as a business, the choice of farm, the organization of the work, the 
equipping of a farm business, capital requirements, profits of farming, 
testing proposed plans, and the farm magagement surveys as sources of 
information. 

This section — Part II — is given over to the activities of a going con- 
cern ; viz., farm bookkeeping and accounting, cost of production, farm labor, 
tenancy, marketing, farm law, and ending with a brief discussion of how 
one is to get started if he is obliged to rely, as many beginners must, 
upon his own initiative and resources. 



335 



CHAPTER XVI 
FARM BOOKKEEPING 

Much has been written on farm bookkeeping, so much in fact that, 
for farm management uses, the bringing together of the excellent material 
from available but scattered sources is perhaps of more real value than to 
attempt to provide original matter. (For references see Nos. 79 to 87 
inclusive in References Index, pages 647 to 655.) 

Definition of Farm Bookkeeping. — Farm bookkeeping is a system of 
records written to furnish a history of the business transactions of the 
farm, with special reference to its financial side. 

Farm bookkeeping is not a direct way of making money, but rather 
a means of showing where the money goes, of pointing out where profits 
are being made and where leaks occur. If a system of books does not 
show a profit, it does not necessarily follow that there is actually less 
money coming from the business, but it does show the need of reorganiz- 
ing the farm business for greater earning power. 

Do Farmers Keep Records? — Investigations show that fully 40 per 
cent of all farmers keep records of some kind. Most of these are only 
records of receipts and expenses. 

In southern Arizona to the question, "Do you keep farm accounts?" 
put to 647 farmers, 179 answered "Yes," and 181 that they kept a partial 
system of accounts. 

Other surveys report record keeping as follows: 



Table 134. 


— Extent op Account Keeping by Farmers 








Number 


Percentage keeping accounts 




Bookkeep- 








Survey 




farms 


ing 




No book 


Percent- 






visited 


accounts, 


book 


accounts 


age keeping 








receipts 
and 


accounts 


but some 
records 


some 
record 








expenses 









Ohio (1918) (general farms) 

Pennsylvania (1917) (dairy farms) 

Florida (1917 truck farms) 

Florida (1917 citrus farms) 



25 


36 


40 


24 


419 


8 


15 


77 


144 


15 


30 


55 


132 


36 


28 


36 



76 
23 

45 
64 



A report of the Farm Demonstration Section of the United States 
Department of Agriculture shows that due to the work of State represen- 
tatives of the Department 37,497 farmers kept accounts for the year 
ending June 30, 1918, as against 18,761 for the preceding year. As a 
22 337 



338 FARM MANAGEMENT 

result of their accounting 4,051 farmers readjusted their businesses to 
increase net income. 

Purpose of Farm Accounts. — Accurate records and accounts are nec- 
essary in the management of every enterprise, great or small, because 
no business can attain greatest continuous success unless its condition 
be determined from time to time. Farming conducted in accordance 
with business principles requires that the farmer or farm manager be 
able to find out how his affairs stand not only with others but with 
himself. 

Experience shows that it is not possible to distinguish profitable 
farms by casual observation. A farmer operating a large business may 
have sufficient funds to give a prosperous appearance to his farm and yet 
not be earning a fair rate of interest on his investment and an equitable 
wage for himself. 

The primary purpose of keeping accounts is usually to obtain infor- 
mation that will help to accumulate property or to increase profits. 
Well kept farm books, embodying a continuous record of business trans- 
actions, point the way to the future. 

Let us tabulate this still more concretely to show that the reason 
for keeping farm books usually rests in one or more of the following 
desires. 

1. To determine the degree of profit that the business is making.- 

2. To suggest ways for increasing profits. 

3. To provide an argument when soliciting loans. 

4. To determine the details of farm investment, receipts, expenses, 
and net income. 

5. To determine the net returns from individual farm enterprises, for 
the purpose of detecting losses or indicating sources of greatest profit. 

6. To furnish a memorandum of bills owed by or to the farm. 

7. To provide a written record of operations for future guidance. 

8. To furnish specific information, as the amount of feed fed to live 
stock, amount of production, and efficiency of methods used in production. 

Record-keeping Results in Closer Attention to Details. — An attempt 
to keep careful i-ecords of the farm business invariably results in closer 
attention to details. Properly heeded, these records will lead eventually 
to a better understanding of and insight into the business affairs of the 
farm, and therefore, as pertinent use is made of them, to constant 
improvement and greater profit. 

Account-keeping Can Be Made Attractive. — Accounts to supply 
pertinent information can be not only a means of increasing profits, but 
a source of real pleasure and satisfaction by presenting in a concise and 
concrete way the financial status of the business. 

Preliminaries in Starting Farm Bookkeeping. — In beginning record- 
keeping it is of vital importance to have a clear understanding as to just 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 339 

what facts about the farm business should be shown by the records day 
by day and at the end of the year. Each one must decide for himself 
what he desires to obtain from his record-keeping. Some men particu- 
larly need accounts of the moneys expended for labor, others of the 
sums paid for feed, and others of the amounts of crops or stock products 
sold. Some operators chiefly desire sufficient records to determine the 
profit made from the entire business during a given year. Others wish 
to analyze their business and find out the enterprises that are being 
operated at a profit and those that are returning a loss. Some farmers 
like to determine their returns in terms of labor income. 

To begin keeping records without some such preliminary considera- 
tion is as foolish as to start digging a foundation for a building without 
deciding on the kind and size of structure to be erected, or to start a 
team on field work without first determining the crop to be grown. 

For obvious reasons the simpler the accounts kept by the beginner 
the greater is the chance of their proving of use. 

Simple accounts may well give way to more complex as the system 
grows familiar and easy to keep. Desire for more detailed and more 
extensive data is sure to accompany a growing recognition of the value 
of properly kept records. 

Scope of Complete Farm Accounts. — A complete system of accounts 
will show: 

(o) How the business stands with the farmer and with others. 

(h) Cost of production of the various farm enterprises. 

(c) Household and personal expenses. 

(d) A history of the various fields and enterprises. 

(e) Basic data for purposes of obtaining loans, and calculating income 
taxes or other taxes. 

Less complete accounts may serve the purpose in mind when keeping 
accounts. Individual need of data will determine the extensiveness of 
the records. 

Simple Accounts. — The more simple accounts may include only (1) 
records of happenings and (2) records of money transactions. 

Simple records of happenings, written down in a way that makes 
reference to them easy, are often of much usefulness. Examples of 
these are dates when animals are bred; dates when men are hired or 
discharged, records of accidents, days when work on a given crop begins 
and ends, weather conditions, occurrence of the first autumn or the last 
spring frost, purchase of animals, dates, rates and periods of obtaining 
loans. 

The most important use of a record showing the cash received and 
paid out, that is records of money transactions, is to determine the 
degree of profitableness of the farm business as a whole, or to find out 
what ones of a number of enterprises are the more profitable. These 
records, however, have other uses. 



340 FARM MANAGEMENT 

They help in checking up bills and in seeing if all payments have 
been properly credited. This value alone is sometimes enough to 
warrant the keeping of these records. 

To secure more detailed data requires additional records to show (1) 
place and amount in use of labor — horse and man, (2) records of pro- 
duction, (3) records of materials used — feed, seed, fertilizer, sprays, 
market packages, etc. These records, together with those of happenings 
and cash transactions, constitute the basis of cost accounting. 

Cost Records. — Cost records, while of great use if properly assembled 
and intelligently interpreted, can be obtained only by the outlay of 
considerable time and attention to detail. 

In cost records there are added to the inventory and cash accounts: 

1. Labor records. 

2. Feed records. 

3. Supply records. 

4. Crop yield records. 

5. Animal production records. 

These require time to summarize and to distribute indirect costs. 

Their use should be undertaken only when the need for the work is 
apparent, and a successful carrying out of the records assured. 

Value of Cost Records. — When conditions permit, the keeping, sum- 
marizing, and studying of such systematic records are of great value. 
The labor records will show the amount of labor, horse and man, expended 
in carrying on the work and the proportion of the labor spent on each 
enterprise. They show the proportion of labor necessary to produce 
income as against labor for odd jobs or routine chores. Labor records 
provide a guide to indicate the number of horses or the amount of labor 
needed to complete the year's work so that plans may be laid in advance 
to insure the necessary labor at times when it is needed. 

Feed records present valuable data on the amounts of grain and rough- 
age consumed by the work stock and in' maintaining breeding stock, 
in carrying on the dairy, poultry, feeding, or other live stock enterprises. 
Their use points out the need for reserve stores of feed and shows the 
kinds of feeds for greatest or most economical gains, furnishes a compari- 
son of the relative profits from different live stock enterprises, and indi- 
cates the balance between crops and live stock. 

Records of crop yields, animal products obtained, and supplies used 
by the different farm enterprises, are useful in that they show what yields 
of crops and by-products are obtained year by year, what and how much 
the animals produce, and by what departments miscellaneous supplies 
are used. 

What Records to Keep. — Farm records may vary from the taking 
of an annual inventory to carrying the most complete and detailed system 
of cost accounts. The following outline illustrates three types of farm, 
accounting from the simplest to the most complex, 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 

Table 135. — Types of Farm Rkcords**! 



341 







Information that may be 


Type 


Records necessary 


obtained 


I. Property record 


1. Inventories made once a 


1. Investment in each kind of 




year 


farm property and net worth of 
the farm as a whole 

2. Increase or decrease in net 
worth during the year 


II. Farm bookkeeping (ac- 


1. Inventories made once a 


1. Investment in each kind of 


counts with the farm as a 


year 


farm property and net worth of 


unit) 


2. Financial records 


each farm as a whole 




3. Value of supplies furnished 


2. Increase or decrease in net 




by the farm to the family 


worth during the year. 




4. Value of board furnished by 


3. Classified summary of farm 




family to paid farm laborers 


receipts and expenditures 




.5. Unpaid family labor de- 


4. Farm income 




voted to farm work 


5. Net farm profit 

6. Household and personal ex- 
penses 

7. Value of food, fuel, and use 
of house furnished by farm to 
family 


III. Farm cost accounts (ac- 


1. Inventories made once a 


1. Investment in each kind of 


counts with the farm and 


year 


farm property and net worth of 


with each farm product 


2. Financial records 


to farm business as a whole 


and department as a sepa- 


3. Value of supplies furnished 


2. Increase or decrease in net 


rate unit) 


by th(^ farm to the family 


worth during the year 




4. Value of board furnished by 


3. Classified summary of farm 




family to paid farm laborers 


receipts and expenditures 




5. Value of other perquisites 


4. Farm income 




furnished by farm to paid farm 


5. Net farm profit 




laborers 


6. Household and personal ex- 




6. Unpaid family labor devoted 


penses 




to farm work 


7. Value of food, fuel, and use 




7. Labor record 


of house furnished by farm to 




8. Feed records 


family 




9. Live stock production re- 


8. Cost per hour of man labor 




cords 


9. Cost per hour of horse labor 




10. Crop supply and yield 


10. Complete distribution of all 




records 


costs 

11. Complete distribution of all 
income 

12. Complete allocation of all 
profits and losses 

13. Cost of production in each 
department 

14. Margin between cost and 
"market value 

15. Efficiency factors in farm 
management 



Use of Inventories. — If only the total personal net gain or net loss of 
the farmer for a given year is wanted, this information can be obtained 
by comparing the inventories taken at the beginning and at the end of 
the farm year. The difference between these inventories gives the net 
increase or decrease for the year in the farmer's capital, thus showing 
personal gain or loss. But this method measures only the amount of 



342 FARM MANAGEMENT 

progress. The increase or decrease in net worth does not represent the 
profit or loss on the farm business, since it is affected also by the affairs 
of the farm family. 

Use of Records of Money Transactions. — If to the inventories is added 
a record of money transactions, an idea can be obtained as to changes in 
capital, amount of profit or loss, extent of household and personal 
expenses, distribution of farm receipts and expenses, and amount of 
labor income. These records constitute the accounts most often used by 
farmers. 

Records of Labor, Feed, Production, etc. — Should analysis be desired, 
the records of inventory and cash transactions may be augmented by 
detailed records of labor, crop production, and live stock production, with 
supplementary notes. Increasing the number of records increases the 
work of keeping them but enlarges the scope of the information obtained. 
In addition to the data forthcoming as indicated in the preceding para- 
graph, the farmer is able from this stricter bookkeeping to determine his 
distribution of costs and income over the different enterprises making 
up his farm business, and thus uncover the income, cost, and profit of 
each group of live stock and each crop to as fine a degree of detail as he 
cares to go. 

Records Used in the Simple System. — Inventories and cash accounts 
(records of cash transactions) constitute a simple system of farm book- 
keeping. A full set of records of inventory, cash transactions, details 
of labor expenditure, and crop and stock production, means an intensive 
system of cost accounting — the "last word" in farm paper work. 

Comparison of Bookkeeping and t)ost Accounting. — Complete farm 
cost accounts if successfully carried out will give the actual, as well as the 
relative, cost and profit of all the farm enterprises, and other valuable 
data as well. But cost records can be obtained only by the outlay of 
much time and by close attention to detail. A man who works hard all 
day at manual labor rarely has inclination to spend his leisure over ledgers. 
Only when the conditions seem to warrant the assumption that the accounts 
will be carried through to a successful end, should they be attempted. 

The difference between bookkeeping and cost accounting should there- 
fore be definitely understood. Let us risk a little repetition. Bookkeep- 
ing is the keeping of records that will set forth the income, cost, and profit 
of the business as a whole, or of a complete unit; cost accounting involves 
the finding of cost, returns, and profit on production units — on a pound 
of beef, a quart of milk, a bushel of grain, etc. Farm bookkeeping is a 
matter of adapting simple methods to the farmer's needs. It is not a 
question of forms or having the accounts on the right side of the page or 
of having them balanced in a certain way; it is a question of a correct 
knowledge of principles, a knowledge that will lead to an understanding of 
the facts as they exist on the particular farm in question. 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 



343 



Supplementary Records. — A possible fourth group could be added to 
Table 135 to cover the keeping of supplementary farm records, not 
particularly necessary to the financial accounts or accounts of happenings, 
yet of value in keeping track of details. Such supplementary records 
are illustrated by the timebook, breeding records, individual cow records 
of milk yield, egg records of pens, number of meals served, pasturage 
records, records of hired teams, etc. 

The Annual Summary as a Means of Determining What Records to 
Keep. — Since the information ultimately desired will determine the kind 
of records to be kept, the character of the final summary or annual 
statement should early receive attention. The following presents a 
graphic outline ^^ for determining the financial status of a farm business. 



Table 136. — Graphic Outline of Farm Summary or Annual Statement 



Item 



Total 



Investment* 

Real e.state 

Work stock 

Live stock 

Machinery and equipment 

Feed and supplies 

Cash to run farm 

Total 

Farm receipts 

Sales: crops, live stock, or stock products 

Other sources 

Feed and supplies accumulated during the year over the 

amount on hand at the first of the year 

Total 

Farm expenses 

Operating 

Unpaid family labor 

Depreciation 

Decrease in feed and supplies taking place during the year 
over the amount on hand at the first of the year. 

Total 

Farm income 

Interest on investment at per cent (a) 

Labor income 

Value operator's labor 

Per cent return on investment (6) 

Value items for family use 



* Use average investment or that of beginning of year, whichever more nearly 
represents the true capital invested in the year's business, 
(a) Use current rate of interest on well-secured farm loans. 
(6) After deducting value of operator's labor from farm income. 



344 



FARM MANAGEMENT 

Annual Statement of Net Worth 





Beginning of 
farm year 


End of farm 
year 


Resources (a) 

All cash on hand 

Real estate 






Live stock 




Machinery 




Feed and supplies 




Household equipment 




Automobile 




Other tangible property 

Accounts owing to you 

Notes owing to you 

Mortgages owing to you 

Bonds and stock owned 




and bonds 








Liabilities (6) 




Notes owed by you 








Interest due or accrued and owed by you 

Total liabilities 




Total net worth (c) 




Increase or decrease in net worth (d) 









(o) Includes all property owned by you and owing to you. 

(b) Includes all amounts which are owed by you to some one else. 

(c) Subtract total liabilities from total resources. 

(d) If total net worth at the end of the year is greater than at the beginning of the 
year the difference is an increase; if less, a decrease. 

Time Element in Keeping Accounts. — The time required in keeping 
accounts depends on the number of records carried and the size of the 
farm. A simple system of records for the ordinary family-size farm does 
not commonly require more than 10 or 15 minutes a day for making 
entries and a few hours at the end of the year for summarizing. Perhaps 
2 or 3 hours or a half-day is needed at the time of starting the books. 
Cost accounting requires more time — probably at least double these 
estimates. From this the time element will increase with the magnitude 
and diversity of the farm business and the data expected, until a point is 
reached where the continual service of one or more bookkeepers is 
required. This is well shown by some of the large enterprises, as cor- 
porations farming large tracts to cattle, sugar beets, cotton, wheat, and 
to other crops and live stock. 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 345 

Technical Training Unnecessary. — Technical bookkeeping training 
or knowledge is not necessary in keeping farm accounts. Methods of 
procedure are not especially difficult for the average man to master, and 
once the desired data are clearly mapped, its recording offers no unsur- 
mountable difficulties. 

Simplifying Accounts. — Some of the difficulties experienced by begin- 
ners in starting a set of farm books will be simplified if the following 
suggestions are accepted: 

1, Treat Farm Business as a Complete Unit.- — Consider the business as 
entirely separate from the individual owning the business. That is, in 
all relations between it and its owner the records should be handled 
exactly as if business and owner were two persons. The necessity of this 
relation is fully recognized in the commercial world, and lack of com- 
prehension of it is one of the causes that prevent many farmers from fully 
understanding the principles of accounting. The merchant rarely takes 
goods from his store for his personal use without charging them to his 
own personal account, just as though they were sold to any other cus- 
tomer. He is usually fully aware that otherwise it would be impossible 
for him to know the actual state of his business affairs. On the other 
hand, the farmer only too often devotes the property of his business to a 
considerable extent to his own personal use without a thought as to the 
accounting consequences, and as a result may get a false idea of the 
results of his farming operations when he balances his accounts. 

On the farm, where the personal affairs of the owner and his household, 
and the farm affairs proper, are interwoven, this point of view is admit- 
tedly difficult to acquire, but it is none the less necessary to attain. 

In order to carry out this idea it is a good plan to consider the general 
funds received for farm products as belonging to the farm, and for the 
owner to maintain a separate purse for his personal requirements, 
refilling it from time to time from the farm funds, and charging his 
personal account on the farm books with the amounts so used. This 
idea may be carried a step further by establishing a separate purse for 
the household expenses, allowing the housekeeper a certain amount 
weekly or monthly on which to run the house. Such practices give a 
man a good perspective of the relations existing between the finances of 
the farm, the household, and himself, and are more generally satisfactory 
to all concerned than the common practice of having a single purse for 
all these purposes. ^^ 

2. Application of Double-entry Principle. — Double-entry is based on 
the fact that every business transaction has, for each party involved, 
two distinct sides. One value is acquired, another is surrendered. For 
instance, a person selling a horse acquires cash value and surrenders 
horse value. If the horse is sold on credit to John Smith, account 
value (the fact that John Smith owes this value) is acquired instead 



346 FARM MANAGEMENT 

of cash value. When he pays for the horse, cash value is acquired and 
account value (he no longer owes anything) is surrendered. If the 
records do not take account of both sides of each transaction they will 
not show the facts. 

Violations of this principle are common. A good but too common 
example is that of carrying the value of manure as a credit to the cattle 
account and not charging this same value to the crop accounts. No 
matter what the transaction, the principle holds good and should never 
be violated. 

In the case of cash transactions where a cash book is used, the double- 
entry principle is automatically followed. Entering the money received 
and giving the description of what was sold for it, charges the cash 
account with the value on the one hand, while the crediting of the proper 
account with the value of the thing sold completes the "double-entry." 

Rules for Determining Charges and Credits. — As a usual thing it will not be 
found difficult to determine for each transaction which account to charge and which to 
credit. The general rule may be briefly stated thus: 

Charge that account which acquires the value. 
Credit that account which surrenders the value. 

A more difficult problem comes up in determining when to charge an expenditure 
of cash to expense and when to investment (purchase) accounts. Also it is sometimes 
hard to tell when to credit a receipt to an income and when to an investment account. 
The rules in his regard are almost as simple as the foregoing, and may be stated 
briefly as follows: 

1. Charge to expense accounts all those things which will be consumed as soon as 
used. Such as seed, twine, feeds, wages, etc., parts for machinery, building repairs. 

2. Charge to investment accounts those things which will be used over and over 
again in the course of the farm business or which are bought for resale in the regular 
course of the business, such as work stock, cows for the dairy herd, breeding animals, 
machines, drain tile, fencing, etc., and animals bought for fattening and resale. 

3. Credit to investment accounts receipts from sales of articles which have formed 
part of the farm equipment or permanent plant, such as old machinery and machinery 
junk, old lumber, work stock, animals from the permanent herds, etc. 

4. Credit to income accounts all receipts for products of the farm or for things 
incidental to production, such as m'lk, eggs, crops raised and sold, market live stock, 
etc., and receipts for labor and machine work d.one by farm labor. 

5. Credit to expense accounts all receipts from expense rebates and for things 
previously charged to expense accounts, such as, feed bags; surplus purchased feed, 
seed, and twine; spare machine parts sold; etc. 

While the foregoing rules will doubtless assist in analyzing transactions 
to determine the proper charges and credits, transactions will sometimes 
occur that seem to fall within what may be called the "twilight zone" 
between the two rules. In such cases good judgment alone must be relied 
on, as no set of rules will cover all cases. 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 



347 



3. Use of "Debit" and "Credit." — The term debit refers to receipts or 
incomes and means that in keeping accounts the account receiving is to 
be debited — i.e., it is debtor for the sum received. 

For example if A pays $25 to B, B is debtor to A for this sum and A is B's creditor 
for it. Thus credit A (cash paid out) and debit B (as cash received). In the same 
manner if you are keeping an account for the dairy you will debit it with money 
received from milk (receipts) and credit it with money spent for concentrates or 
labor (payments). Two columns are used to show the transactions thus: 





Table 137. — Entering Debits and 


Credits 




Date 


Item 


Dr. 

(receipts) 


Date 


Item 


Cr. 
(payments) 


May 31 
June 30 


Monthly sale of milk. . . . 
Monthly sale of milk. . . . 
Sale of 3 calves 


90.00 
85.00 
18.00 


May 31 


Concentrates 


27.00 









Oil 



Date 


Item 


Dr. (receipts) 


Cr. (payments) 


May 31 


Monthly sale of milk 


90.00 

85.00 
18.00 






Concentrates 


27 00 


June 30 


Monthly sale of milk 






Sale of 3 calves 





As a matter of form debits are entered on the left-hand column or 
page — usually marked with abbreviation ''Dr." and credit on right-hand 
column or page, abbreviated as "Cr." 

Interpretation and Use of Results. — The mere keeping of accounts 
does not have any influence on profits. Farm accounts are only a mirror 
to reflect existing conditions. Picturing a situation, they draw attention 
to the need or lack of need of a corrective. Farm accounting is not in 
itself a means of increasing profits, nor a direct producer of wealth. Its 
value lies in pointing the way to better or different practices. Farmers 
who find, on keeping detailed records for the first time, that they are 
not making as much money as they thought they were, sometimes blame 
the books for the loss, instead of taking home the lesson that the records 
teach. 

In making deductions from cost records, hasty conclusions should 
be avoided. Sometimes a positive decrease in a year's profits will ensue 
if an enterprise be dropped because, taken alone, it has failed to pay. 
Cows may not be showing a high net profit, yet if they are sold, there 
may be no other profitable way of using roughage, and hence a loss in 



348 FARM MANAGEMENT 

the crop producing it. Labor devoted night and morning to milking 
and feeding cows, and charged to them, might be entirely wasted if the 
cows were sold with no available substitute use for such labor. Any 
changes if made, should be brought about gradually and the indicated 
effects noted in their relation to all other farm activities. 

Discussion of Records 

Definition of Inventory. — The term "farm inventory" is used to 
designate lists taken at stated intervals, of property, with values affixed, 
including supplies and produce on hand, together with a statement of 
the amount of cash on hand and money owing to or owed by the farmer. 

Value of Inventory. — Such lists or "inventories" are conceded to be 
the most imjDortant of all farm records. They constitute the foundation 
for all financial studies. 

Use of an Inventory. — The uses of an inventory are important and 
varied. Taken alone it will show the farmer exactly what he is worth 
and will be a guarantee of solvency and an aid in securing credits and 
loans in times of need. Comparisons made of inventories taken a year 
apart will show the rate of progress or retrogression during the year, and 
definitely measure the degree of change. Taken in conjunction with a 
cash account for the year the inventory shows how much has been made 
by farming and to what extent this has been offset by household and per- 
sonal expenses. The inventory, either alone or with cash accounts, will 
not, however, show what crops or what animals are responsible for profits 
or losses. Furthermore, the inventory taken alone shows only the per- 
sonal gain or loss. It does not differentiate between the farmer's stand- 
ing and the farm standing. Increase in personal expenses will reduce the 
profit showing; conversely, frugality in personal expenses may show undue 
farm profits. 

The inventory tends both to check undue expenditure and to allay 
pessimism. If extra cash on hand tempts to free spending, the inventory 
may hoist the danger signal and show that the surplus money comes from 
selling short on some class of live stock or other farm property. On the other 
hand, money may be less plentiful than usual and so induce a feeling of 
discouragement which is not warranted if the inventory shows a healthy 
increase in crops and stock on hand or a justifiable increase in equipment. 

Taking an Inventory. — The mechanics of inventory taking are simple. 
The actual taking requires but a few hours time for the usual family-size 
farm. For convenience the inventory is ordinarily divided into groups 
to show: 

1. Real estate. 

2. Live stock. 

3. Machinery and tools. 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 



349 



-iJL_£feo«^ER=v --Se-KiLi^ n iO, ■ 







^4gW~ 



f=-_t-izq:|si 



-tr- 



^^.c^H^ 



fe^^z=tiifcrxt-"55-r^5r< 







Fig. 68. 



y^v^ ,,--<^ _ _ V -V*-^ . - . ^^li^*-*:^^'' 




^C^'^r^-'i 



0-,.-r .frr-^,-^-- 



1- "-*: 


■' -^'-i- 


1- 



:'::1i=' 



Fig. 69. 
Example of Inventory on Three-column Journal Ruling. Taken one Year Apart. 



350 FARM MANAGEMENT 

4. Feed, produce, and supplies. 

5. Cash. 

6. Bills receivable. 

7. Bills payable. 

Real Estate. — Under real estate are placed the land and the buildings. 
Each building is listed and valued separately. The land together with 
its permanent improvements — drainage and irrigation ditches, bridges, 
roads, fences — is valued on an acreage basis. It is usually desirable to 
distinguish between different sorts of land, e.g., tilled fields, pasture, 
wood lots. 

Live stock covers horses, cattle, sheep, hogs, poultry, etc., listed by 
groups and itemized so far as practicable. Horses and dairy cows are 
listed by name or number and age ; other classes are separated into a few 
outstanding groups for easy valuing. 

Machinery, implements, wagons, and tools usually contain the largest 
number of items, as farm equipment tends to be varied and manifold. 
In taking the inventory of these items it is important not to overlook any 
items and to exercise care in placing values. 

If it is carefully taken and each item listed separately, a machinerj^ 
and small-tool inventory on a farm will fill several pages. If such detail 
is not desired, the minor tools of the value of less than $1 each may be 
grouped into a class together and a lump valuation given, but such a 
course is not advisable. It is surprising what a large number of these 
small tools there are on a farm and, furthermore, what a number are mis- 
placed during the year. A carefully itemized inventory once a year is 
a help in locating the minor tools, and inventory day is a convenient 
time to call in all loaned tools — they have a habit of changing owners if they 
remain too long away from home. All farmers know how easy it is to 
lose a hammer or an ax, but an old wagon never disappears. It is time 
well spent to go through the buildings each year and make a list of the 
machines and tools, using the best judgment possible in placing values 
on different articles. 

Feed and supplies include all feed purchased or produced, all farm 
products reserved for feed or for sale, all seed, and all supplies such as 
oil, sacks, binding twine, fruit boxes, lumber, cement, etc. Weight or 
careful measurement data should be used. It is sometimes difficult to 
estimate closely the amount of feed and supplies of various kinds on hand 
and to determine the proper value for same. Yet this is important in 
that much of the income of the farm may be in the form of grain or rough- 
age held for feed. When the total of these items is more at the end of the 
year than at the beginning it represents a gain and is counted as a receipt; 
when less at the end of the year, an expense. Care must be used in 
listing the items to include all farm supplies, such as binding twine, 
fertilizers, machine oil, lumber, etc. 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 351 

Cash to Run the Business. — A certain amount of money is necessary 
for carrying on the farm business. This amount will vary widely on 
different farms, according to whether the farm receipts are distributed 
throughout the year or received at one time. It should represent the 
average amount of money that the farmer has on hand at all times during 
the year for the purpose of paying current farm expenses. Money, on 
hand and in bank should be listed separately. This group should be 
accurate in every detail. 

Bills receivable carries the value of all bills due the farm from others. 
The face value should be used until the account is settled or proven 
worthless. 

Bills payable contains the value of all bills owed by the farm to others, 
including store bills, loans, mortgages, etc. 

The first six divisions constitute the total value of the farm property, 
while the deducting of division 7 will result in a figure giving the net 
worth of the farmer. 

Household Goods, Etc. — In the farm inventory no mention is made of 
the household furnishings or personal effects, as only the farm and its 
accessories are to be considered. However, the dwelling is included in 
the value of the farm, as it is a part of the real estate and would be 
included if the place were sold. 

The time of taking will vary in different communities. In the north- 
ern and eastern States perhaps the best date is March 1 or April 1. In 
the corn belt and central States, March 1 is favored. In the Western 
States November 1 is usually selected. In the South January 1, or Feb- 
ruary 1 is satisfactory. The most satisfactory time is the season that 
best combines slackness of work demands and small amount of stuff 
on hand to be listed. 

Form for Inventory-taking. — No particular form is needed in taking 
an inventory. A blank book, blank sheets of paper, or the so-called 
stationer's ordinary 3-column journal ruling will do. Provision is needed 
for (1) a wide space in which to give a description the various items, and 
(2) additional columns to cover the number, rate, and total value. • In the 
illustrati-^n prepared for the text, still another column could well be added, 
to carry a statement of the original cost of purchased items. This helps 
in setting valuation and depreciation rates. 

The inventory used for closing the accounts of a given year also 
serves as a starting point for the next succeeding year, so that the work 
once done serves two purposes. 

Determining Inventory Values. — In fixing values for the inventory 
actual market values are assigned to be based on the condition of the 
various items and an estimate of market demands. 

This work calls for considerable judgment, especially in valuing the 
real estate. ^^ 



352 



FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 138. — Sample Farm Inventory s' 





April 1, 1918 


April 1, 1919 


Divisions and items of property 


Quan- 
tity 


Value per 
unit 


Valuation 


Quan- 
tity 


Value per 
unit 


Valuation 


Real- estate: 

Land and improvements, acres. . . . 
Live stock: 

Cows, dry and in milk 


120 

1 
1 
2 
1 


$ 80.00 

125.00 
40.00 
30.00 

115.00 


$ 9,600.00 

125. 00 
40.00 
60.00 

115.00 


120 

1 
2 
4 


$ 80.00 

100. 00 
60.00 
25.00 


$ 9,600.00 

100. 00 
120.00 




100.00 
















340. 00 

200. 00 

175. 00 

225.00 

35.00 






320. 00 


Horses: 






175.00 


Jack. 14 years old 






160. 00 




225.00 








Died 












1 
"3 




635. 00 
75.00 


7 

1 
24 




560. 00 


Swine: 


75.00 


60.00 

45.00 

6.00 


420. 00 




45.00 


Pigs 


20.00 


60.00 


144.00 








'56 

2 
2 
1 




135.00 

75.00 

1,185.00 

20.00 

150. 00 

20.00 


62' ' 

2 

1 
1 




609.00 


Poultry 


1.50 


2.00 

8.00 
65.00 
17.00 


124.00 
1,498.25 


Machinery and tools: 


10.00 
75.00 
20.00 


16.00 




65.00 


Disc harrow, double. 8-ft 

not shown here) 


17.00 


Farm produce 


32 
284 
30 
17 
11 


2.00 
1.00 
1.00 
1.00 
23.00 


1,633.50 

64.00 

284 . 00 

30.00 

17.00 

253 00 


124 
302 

50 

201^ 

15 


1.50 
0.80 
0.75 
.1.50 
20.00 


1,498.25 
186.00 




241.00 




37.50 




30. 50 




300. 00 








100 
50 

'26 


0.03^i 
0.03?i 


648.00 

3.50 
1.88 


250 

5 
50 
12 




795.60 


Purchased feeds and supplies: 


0. 03K 

6.00 
0.35 
0. 10 


8.75 








30.00 








17.50 




0. 10 


2.20 


1.20 






Total feed and supplies 

Notes and accounts: 

Harry Smith note for cow 






7.58 

100. 00 
42.00 






57.45 
















63.00 


Heiiry Robinson for work 


5.00 








142.00 
256.35 

13,472.43 

4,000.00 






68.00 






195.49 






13,827.79 


Notes and accounts owing: 

Farm mortgage 






4,000.00 


1 


200. 00 






1 






Total liabilities (amounts owed 
Summary: 






4,000.00, 

13,472.43 

4,000.00 




4.200.00 




13,827.79 




1 




4,200.00 












1 


9,472.43 


i 




9,627.79 


Increase $155.35 for the year 


1 





Valuing Lands for Inventory Purposes. — In valuing land for inventory 
purposes, strict adherence to whatever principle is adopted should be 
continued so as to eliminate all fluctuations due to variations in method 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 353 

used. The three objects of valuing physical property for inventory 
purposes are, generally speaking, threefold: (1) to establish a basis for 
determining financial worth at recurrent periods, thus reflecting increases 
or decreases in net worth; (2) to ascertain the distribution of capital 
invested; that is, the amount of money tied up in each class of property; 
(3) to serve as a basis in farm cost accounts for charging depreciation 
and interest on investment. 

Bases of Land Valuing. — In the valuation of land there are at least 
three bases that may be considered: (1) cost; (2) sale or market value; 
(3) capitalized rent. 

Cost Value of Lands. — The difficulty with the cost basis in appraising 
farm lands is that it fails to fulfill completely any one of the three objects 
of valuation as hereinbefore specified. This is partly because of the 
personal element present in farm accounting, so that if the land value be 
based on cost it will certainly not reflect the farmer's present net worth. 
In many cases the land, when obtained, cost so little that to use the 
cost figure, under present day conditions, would not be in line with actual 
conditions. Again, many farms have been inherited, thus costing their 
present owners nothing. For these reasons, generally speaking, the cost 
basis is not acceptable in land valuations for farm inventory purposes. 
Where the land has recently been purchased, however, cost is the best 
appraisal basis. 

Market Value of Lands. — The sale or market-value basis will doubtless 
prove the most practical in the majority of cases, but certain precautions 
are necessary in applying it. If this method is adopted the land should 
be appraised as nearly as possible at a figure representative of the 
current price in the neighborhood of the same kind and quality of land. 
By current price is not meant a forced sale price, nor yet a fancy suburban 
lot valuation, but such a price as the more recent sales to farmers have 
shown to be the real market value of land in the locality. Almost 
every farm will include areas of different value per acre. These should 
be separately priced in accordance with their values, and, to facilitate 
future appraisals, each field or parcel of land may be designated by a 
letter or number for purposes of identification. The number of acres 
in each kind of land, multiplied by its appraised value per acre, will give, 
when footed up, the total appraised value of the land. 

It is sometimes rather difficult to judge of the actual market value 
of farm land. Especially is this true in regions where there is great 
activity in the land market, and also in those sections of the countrj^ where 
there is little or no buying and selling of farm lands. In the former case 
the element of speculation and in the latter the scarcity of sales pre- 
vent the taking of sales prices as a guide. 

Rent Value of Lands. — The third basis, capitalized rent, is probably 
the best index of the intrinsic value of land. Where this method can be 

23 



354 FARM MANAGEMENT 

applied it is probably the most accurate one that can be used from an 
economic standpoint. Its main difficulty from the standpoint of farm 
inventorying is its application where the land is being farmed by its 
owner. The earnings are produced by the entire farm property, land, 
buildings, stock, equipment, together with the labor employed, and the 
difficulty lies in allocating to each of these factors of production its true 
share of the earnings. Another practical difficulty lies in the fact that 
crops are not uniformly productive, neither are seasons, and the net 
rent would be more variable and inconstant, both up and down, than the 
market value basis, which usually follows a general trend, either upwards 
or downwards. 

Thus while it is undoubtedly true that the net rent over a period of 
years is an excellent if not the best index of its actual value, there are 
practical difficulties of application that render its use for farm inventory 
purpose unavailable in the majority of cases. 

Valuing Lands of Varying Values Separately. — In appraising the 
farm land, especially if cost accounts are to be carried, it is desirable that 
each kind of land (as crop land, permanent pasture, woodland, etc.) 
be valued as nearly as possible at its relative value as compared with the 
other kinds. In some cases it has been found expedient to go still further 
and assign to each separate piece of land on the farm its own value per 
acre. The value per acre of each kind of land multiplied by its area 
will thus give the total land value as appraised by this method. 

This method is a good one to follow, for on practically all farms there 
are found areas of different value per acre. Thus some tillable land may 
be high in fertility and easily worked, being for this reason worth con- 
siderably more per acre than other tillable land of lower fertility or less 
desirable physical characteristics. Again, many farms include areas 
unfit for tillage by reason of swampy, rocky, or very hilly topography. 
Woodland and brushy areas are found in nearly all agricultural regions. 
In some cases the woodland is worth more, in others less, than the best 
tillable land, depending on the section of the* country and the quality 
of the timber. To appraise all these at a uniform rate per acre would 
not be in accordance with the facts, and it is the facts that are desired 
when making an inventory. 

Valuing Orchards and Semi-permanent Plantings. — The .appraisal 
of orchards and similar semi-permanent crops, such as asparagus beds, 
berry plantations, etc., is best made as one with the land they occupy. 
They are, strictly speaking, a part of the makeup of the land value, for, 
if the land be sold, they are legally a part of the sale and go with the land. 
In appraising land carrying such crops the value should not be over- 
estimated on the basis of expected returns, however certain it may appear 
they will be. Conservative judgment should be used. The common 
basis for valuing land may be employed -or, if the costs of bringing the 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 355 

crop to bearing age are known, they may be added to the value of the 
bare land for the period which must elapse from time of planting until 
self sustaining age is reached. The full value should be maintained during 
the prime productive hfe, and then, as productivity wanes, the value 
should be gradually decreased until, when the fruitfulness of the crop 
ceases, it is again reduced to the value of the bare land. 

Valuing Implements, Machinery, and Tools. — Some difficulty is 
occasionally experienced in placing a proper value on machinery and tools. 
The usual tendency is to place these values too low. Farmers generally 
consider a machine worth what it would bring at a public auction. There 
are two reasons why machines, on the average, go for less than they are 
worth when sold at public sale. First, an auction is a forced sale. 
Usually there are many ai'ticles that are not needed by any of the buyers, 
yet they are sold, but obviously at a sacrifice. This, of course, has a 
tendency to cause all articles to bring a little less than they are worth. 
Second, a person in buying at a public auction always assumes the risk 
that things are not exactly as represented, or that the whole truth is not 
always told. This risk has to be paid for and the result is a lower price. 
Probably the best way to place the value on a machine is to estimate as 
carefully as possible the number of years of life remaining; then by 
considering the age and cost of the machine, a fairly correct value can 
be assigned. 

Valuing Farm Animals. — In placing values on animals, the farm 
value should be recorded rather than the market value. The farm value 
is the market value less costs of hauling or driving to market and selling. 
These costs will vary with the distance to market, the size of the load,' 
the character of the road, and the selling method. 

Valuing Field Crops. — In the case also of grain, hay, and similar field 
crops, the value assigned should be the farm value. With wheat, for 
instance, where the haul is not excessive and the roads fairly good, the 
cost of hauling may run from 4 to 6 ^ per bushel. Under such conditions 
when inventorying for this particular farm the value should be placed at 
from 4 to 6^ below the market price. 

Effects of Appreciation and Depreciation upon Values. — In fixing 
values, the judgment of one taking an inventory will be helped out if he 
recalls that the older stock, or machinery, or buildings becomes, the less 
they are worth. Depreciation is constantly occurring. 

Appreciation of Land. — It often happens that the increase in land 
values from year to year will more than offset the depreciation in buildings 
and other improvements. If this increase in land values is at a moderate 
rate it may be safe to assume that there has been no net loss on real estate 
through depreciation for that particular year. Furthermore, on well- 
managed farms the amount spent for repairs and for the maintenance of 
the buildings and fences is sufficient to keep them in nearly as good 
condition as they were at the beginning of the year. In other words, 



356 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



as soon as one stops repairing or keeping up buildings and fences the 
rate of depreciation is greatly accelerated. In the case of tile drains, 
which are a part of the farm, the depreciation largely depends upon the 
quality of the tile and the care used in laying them and in keeping the 
outlets open. On farms in regions where the land values are not advanc- 
ing, if there is a wood lot the annual increase in the growth of timber 
may offset any loss through depreciation. 

Depreciation of Machinery. — A machine depreciates in market value 
rapidly the first year used, or even the first few months used. That is, 
a mowing machine may sell new for $85, but let it be used a month, 
thereby making it second hand, it may be difficult to obtain $50 for it. 
This is even more marked with other kinds of tools. The farmer buying 
new equipment during the year will find the market value of that equip- 
ment at the end of the year much less than the original cost. For the 
second and third year's use the market value of the machine may not 
appreciably decrease. In other words, a mower that has been in use 
three years will sell for almost as much as one that has been in use three 
months. The rate of depreciation on machinery has been variously 
estimated at from 6 to 10 per cent. This rate, however, is affected by a 
large number of factors. Some farmers, who take care of their machin- 
ery, will make an implement last twice as long as others; on some farms 
the rate of depreciation must necessarily be high. 

Depreciation of Dairy Cows 

Pennsylvania Studies of Dairy Cows. — Studies in Pennsylvania'' provide 
data to show the rate of depreciation of dairy cows and work stock. 

Table 139. — Depreciation op Dairy Cows (Studied on 378 Farms Operated by 

Owners, Chester County, Pennsylvania) 



Number 



Value 
per herd 



Total value 



First inventory 

Cows purchased 

Cows raised 

Total 

Second inventory 

Cows sold and slaughtered 

Total 

Difference 

Increase at end of year in value 

Total loss 

Average investment 

Rate of depreciation per cent. . . 



4,196 
589 
345 



4,164 

895 



$56.10 
63.84 
63.84 



57.01 
37.36 



0.91 



$235,400.00 
37,605.00 
22,025.00 



295,030.00 



237,430.00 
33,437.00 



270,867.00 



24,163.00 
3,789.00 



27,952.00 

236,415.00 

11.82 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 



357 



The results of the calculation are surprisingly large, and the figures 
for different regions vary widely. Thus for this area the average annual 
loss on dairy cows from depreciation in value is 11.82 per cent of the aver- 
age of the inventory values for the beginning and the end of the year. 

Michigan Studies of Depreciation of Dairy Coivs. — The following table 
gives a similar calculation for a survey in an important dairy center in 
southern Michigan (Lenawee County), in which the corresponding rate 
is only 4.07 per cent. 

Table 140. — Depreciation of Dairy Cows (Studied on 300 Farms, Lenawee 

County, Michigan)''' 





Number 


Value 

per 

head 


Total value 


First inventory 


2,291 
184 
236 


$53.23 

48.48 
48.48 


$121 942 00 


Cows purchased 


8,921 00 


Cows raised 


11,441.00 






Total 






142,304 00 






Second inventory 


2,215 
466 


51.90 
42.00 


114 967 00 


Cows sold and slaughtered 


19 572 00 






Total 






134 539 00 






Loss (including decrease in value at end of year).. . 
Decrease in value at end of year 




1.33 


7,765.00 
2,946.00 


Total loss » 






4 819 00 


Average investment 


118 454 00 


Rate of depreciation per cent 


4.07 



Appreciation and Depreciation of Work Horses. Appreciation and 
Depreciation of Work Horses — Illinois, Ohio and New York. — The average 

Table 141. — Appreciation and Depreciation of Horses — Illinois, Ohio, 

New York 



State and number of 
horses 


Percentage of 

horses that 

showed 


Num- 
ber 
of 
deaths 


Num- 
ber 
bought 


Num- 
ber 
sold 


Num- 
ber 
colts 
bought 


Num- 
ber 
colts 
sold 


Num- 
ber 
colts 
fed 


Appre- 
ciation, 
per cent 


No 
appre- 
ciation, 
per cent 




18.75 

21.95 

4.95 


81.25 
78.05 
95.05 


3 
6 


21 
9 
6 


21 

17 

3 


2 
2 

1 


1 
2 


43 


Ohio (72 horses) 

New York (90 horses) 


7 
18 






The three states (316 horses) 


15.60 


84.40 


9 


36 


41 


5 


3 


68 



358 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



net depreciation, based on 316 horses in Illinois, Ohio, and New York, was 
found to be $4,50 per horse. "^^^ Of this amount $2.70 per horse was due 
to the death of nine horses, valued at $855. Depreciation varied from 
$11.60 per horse in New York to an appreciation of $2.10 per horse in 
Ohio. The table shows the percentage of horses that appreciated in 
value, the percentage that did not, and the factors influencing the aggre- 
gate depreciation or appreciation by States. 

On the Illinois and New York farms, colts became work horses when 
from 2}-^ to 4 years of age. The age of work horses that depreciated in 
value varied considerably, depending on their usage and care. The 
average of those that neither appreciated nor depreciated in value was 
about 8 years, and the average age of those that depreciated in value was 
about 11 years. In Ohio data showing the age of all the horses studied 
were not obtained; however, the data that were obtained along this line 
showed about the same results as those in Illinois and New York. 

Depreciation of Horses — Pennsylvania. — The average annual depre- 
ciation of horses on 378 farms studied in Chester County, Pennsylvania,^ 
was found to be $7 per head. 

Here horse depreciation amounted to: 

Table 142. — Depreciation of Horses (Studied on 378 Farms Operated by 
Owners, Chester County, Pennsylvania)' 



Number 



Value 

per 

head 



Total value 



Value at first inventory 

Value of horses purchased. . . . 
Value of horses raised 

Total 

Value at second inventory . . . 
Value of horses sold 

Total 

Loss 

Increase in price during year. 

Total loss 

Average investment 

Rate of depreciation per cent 



1,369 
103 



1,367 
64 



$135.98 



157 
157 



138.95 
128.02 



2.97 



$186,183.00 

16,208.00 

1,259.00 



203,650.00 



189,947.00 
8,193.00 



198,140.00 



5,510.00 
4,060.00 



9,570.00 

188,065.00 

5.09 



Depreciation of Horses — Michigan. — On 300 farms studied in Lenawee 
County, Michigan, the average rate of horse depreciation was found 
to amount to $7.10 per head.^^ These figures were determined largely 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 



359 



by the practice of farmers in disposing of horses while they were still 
salable at a fairly satisfactory price, and would undoubtedly have been 
much greater if all farm horses were kept until their usefulness was at 
an end. 

Table 143. — Depreciation of Horses (Studied on 300 Owner Farms, Lenawee 

County, Michigan)" 



Total 
number 



Value 
per head 



Total value 



Horses at beginning of year* 

Horses purchased 

Horses raised 


1,027 
90 
37 


$126.50 
161.31 
161.31 


$129,912.00 

14,518.00 

5,968.00 


Total 






150,398.00 






Horses at end of year 


1,033 

87 


132.91 
142.63 


137,299 00 


Horses sold 


12 409 00 






Total 






149 708 00 






Loss 




6.41 


690 00 


Increase in price during year 


6 621 00 






Total loss . 






7 311 00 


Average investment 


150 053 00 


Rate of depreciation 


4.87 











*Does not include three stallions valued at $1,100 apiece. 



Depreciation of Horses — New York. — Cornell found the average 
annual depreciation of horses on 14 New York farms for the year 1912, 
and on 31 New York farms for 1913, to be $14.03 and $12.10 per horse 
unit, respectively. ^^^ Of the 40 farms studied, 12 showed an appreciation 
of horses. 

Depreciation of Horses — Minnesota. — Minnesota from a 4 years' study 
(1904 to 1907, inclusive) gives figures for farms in three different counties. 
In Rice County depreciation varied from $0.98 in 1905 to $15.48 in 1904, 
averaging for the 4 years, $5.56 per head. In Lyon County depreciation 
varied from $4.20 in 1905 to $9.86 in 1904, averaging per year $6.94 
per head. In Norman County depreciation varied from $2.60 in 1907 
to $7.37 in 1904, averaging per year $5.82 per head. 

It is pointed out in the text that depreciation of the horse is an expen- 
sive item to farmers who are not able to control this expense by means of 
clever selling methods and by the use of young horses. Shrewd selling, 
however, does not affect the general principle of depreciation, since thus 
the loss is passed on to the buyer. 



360 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Minnesota Experiment Station Bulletin 145 gives results of a further 
study of horse depreciation in the above-mentioned counties. Records 
for Rice County for the period 1908 to 1912, inclusive, show a variation 
in depreciation from $0.28 in 1910 to $5.10 in 1909, and an average per 
year of $3.05 per head. In Lyon County the study covers a period of 
3 years, 1908 to 1910, inclusive. The depreciation varied from $1.47 
in 1910 to $5.60 in 1909, averaging per year $3.06 per head. In Norman 
County the work covered a period of 4 years, 1908 to 1911, inclusive. 
The depreciation varied from $0.51 in 1910 to $3.42 in 1911, averaging per 
year $1.48 per head. It is pointed out in this bulletin that the annual 
depreciation as shown above is not high enough to represent a proper 
average charge through a long term of years. Abnormal conditions 
in the Minnesota horse market were largely responsible for the low 
depreciation charge. 

Depreciation of Horses — Texas. — In Ellis County, Texas, depreciation 
was found to amount to but 5 per cent annually.^ 

Depreciation of Horses — Missouri. — A Missouri study^^^ resulted in 
finding that as a general rule 8 to 10 per cent depreciation on work horses 
over a period of 10 years is figured. This is on the basis that a horse 
begins work as a 3-year-old and lives to the age of 13 or 14 years. In 
figuring the cost to himself of keeping his horses, however, the farmer is 
likely to find this figure inapplicable. The average depreciation of 10 
per cent while applying to any one horse over a period of 10 years, is not a 
cost to the farmer in that proportion unless the farmer follows the prac- 
tice of keeping his horses to about the age mentioned. Any variation 
from this practice, though not affecting the rate of depreciation on any one 
horse, does affect the depreciation cost that falls to any one owner. In 
order to study the rate of depreciation on work horses at different ages, 
a number of horses on which there were complete data were grouped 
according to age, and the average price per head determined. It was 
found that from 1 year to 2 years of age the increase in value averaged $41 
or 57 per cent; from 2 years to 3 years the increase averaged $16 or 14.2 
per cent on the previous value; from 3 to 4 years the increase was $25 
or 19.4 per cent; from 4 to 5 years the increase in value averaged $11 or 
7.2 per cent. After the fifth year there was a decrease in value. From 
5 to 6 years the depreciation averaged $12 or 7.3 per cent, which about 
equalled the gairi' of the year before ; from 6 to 7 years the depreciation 
was $9 or 5.9 per cent; between 7 and 8 years there was no appreciable 
depreciation; between 8 and 9 years the depreciation was $3 or 2.1 
per cent of the previous year's value; between 9 and 10 years the depre- 
ciation was negligible; between 10 and 11 years the depreciation aver- 
aged $18 or 12.8; between 11 and 12 years the depreciation averaged 
$28 or 22.8 per cent. It will be seen from this that the heavy rate of 
depreciation starts after the age of 10 years is reached. 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 361 

From a study of these work-horses, averaging five to six head per farm, 
it was found that the net depreciation on the total number was usually- 
very small because the appreciation on young stock tended to offset 
the depreciation on the older stock. This is brought about by the farmer's 
practice of usually keeping a young team or two and disposing of the 
older horses when they are at the high figure or shortly afterward. 

Depreciation of Farm Equipment. Depreciation of Farm Equipment, 
Minnesota, 1902-7. — Parker and Cooper report for Minnesota^* findings 
covering average depreciation as follows: 

Table 144. — Annual Depreciation of Farm Machinery, — Minnesota 

Average 

Grain binders $7.91 

Grain drills and seeders 6 . 75 

Thrashing outfit 12 . 00 

Corn binders 10 . 03 

Corn planters 7.15 

Corn cultivators 7 . 25 

Mowers 7.80 

Hay tedders 4 . 84 

Hay loaders 1 1 . 78 

Hay rakes 7 . 80 

Gang plows 7 . 40 

Sulky plows 8 . 42 

Walking plows 6 . 09 

Wagons 4 . 89 

Harrows 8 . 72 

^ Discs 5 . 19 

Manure spreaders 11 . 67 

Hay racks 7 . 76 

Reapers 8 . 13 

Grain tanks 3 . 47 

Sleds 5 . 81 

Fanning mills 4 . 58 

Horse weeders 5.71 

Harness (heavy) 6.17 

Gasohne engines 7 . 35 

California Studies of Depreciation of Farm Equipment. — In California, 
the average life of buildings is estimated at 20 years, the length of service 
depending a good deal, of course, on use, construction, and attention 
in the way of painting and repairs. In general, then, for each $100 put 
into buildings in the state, $5 or 5 per cent must be subtracted each 
year. 

Dairy cows are at their prime for 8 years; for each $100 invested one 
must therefore deduct $12 per year or 12 per cent. They are, however, 
today worth fully 50 per cent for beef when too old for milk, so that the 
actual rate of depreciation is 4 per cent ($75 — 50 = $25 = 333^^ per 
cent of cost; divide 333^3 by 8 for annual percentage of depreciation). 



362 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Implements and machinery wear with the amount of use. For in- 
stance where a lot of development work is being done Fresno scrapers 
may last only 2 years, while for general use they will last three times as 
long. Plows in gravel soil will wear out more quickly than when used 
in loam soils. Cultivators in beet work will not last as long as those in 
corn. In general, however, implements are considered as good for 10 
years, or 10 per cent depreciation a year. 

Work horses and mules are good for 10 years on an average. Depre- 
ciation must therefore be charged at 10 per cent a year. 

Depreciation on other live stock such as poultry, swine, and sheep 
takes into account not only the term of productivity but the value as 
food at the end of the profitable period of breeding. 

Sheep are good for 4 years and depreciation would therefore be 25 per 
cent on the producing powers. They are worth 75 per cent of first value 
as mutton, however, so the depreciation would be but one-fourth of 25 
per cent, or 6 per cent. 

In the same way breeding hogs for slaughter purposes are worth 50 
per cent of mature values at end of 6 years of service — or depreciation is 
50 per cent divided by 6 or about 9 per cent. 

Poultry are estimated as good for 2 years of laying life and are worth 
50 per cent of first value for meat. Depreciation is therefore 50 per cent 
divided by 2, or 25 per cent. 

To these figures of depreciation must be added the normal death 
rate in animals after reaching full value. This, in general, may be taken 
at 2 per cent for cattle and horses, 8 per cent for swine, 2 per cent for 
sheep, 10 per cent for fowls. 

These figures are based on stockmen's estimates, and may be only 
approximate. 

If, however, these are accepted as about right, figures of depreciation 
(covering decrease in value and mortality) therefore amount to: stock 
cattle 6 per cent, dairy cows 6 per cent, work stock 12 per cent, swine 
17 per cent, sheep 8 per cent, poultry 35 percent. See "Miscellaneous 
Costs," Chapter XIX for further data on depreciation of equipment. 

The Cash Book 

Description of the Cash Book. — The simplest form of cash book consists 
of a record of cash outlay and income, showing day by day what is sold 
or purchased, the rate received or paid, and the total value involved in 
the transaction. These items are entered in the cash book, using either 
two columns for the totals, or two connecting pages. Whenever money 
is received, the amount is placed in the column or on the page set aside 
for the recording of all receipts; conversely, when money is paid out it is 
entered in the space reserved for all records of expenditures. The usual 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 363 

practice is to use the left-hand column or the left-hand page for receipts 
and the right-hand spaces for expenditures. In farm bookkeeping less 
confusion follows the use of the terms "receipts" and "expenses" than 
"debits" and "credits," although the latter is entirely in keeping with 
business practice. Under the common method it is the practice to enter 
"receipts" on one page and "expenditures" on another. Under one 
head place all items sold, as stock, crops, and other products. 



'yL«v. 1 . ! r*~ Wtt.:-. -V--"*~ _i __; 

, _L. &>.*J '•^ ytTi * > ' ■ ' ' " ' ^_ . H^^ -j ^ 

^Hii. _ _4 _- [4. \^ _ 

z~ _ ^'T^z z i - -r — Jtizzz 







-t r 



Fig. 70. — Example of diary and cashbook on three-column journal ruling. 

Example of Simple Cash Book. — One method of keeping cash receipts 
and expenditures^' is illustrated below. 

T.\BLE 145. — Example of Simple Cash Book 

RECEIPTS (to go on left-hand page) 
(year) 

April 2 20 bu. potatoes at $.90 $18. 00 

2 18 dozen eggs at $.41 7 . 38 

7 2 tons hay at $22.00 44 . 00 

7 1 cow to J. Brown 77 . 50 

7 30 dozen eggs at $0.40 12.00 

7 3 bu. seed potatoes at $1.50 4.50 $163.38 



364 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



EXPENDITURES (to go on right-hand page) 
(year) 

April 2 1 ton cotton seed meal for dairy $55 . 00 

2 Strap for work harness 0.35 

2 Personal 2 . 25 

2 Household 1 . 60 

7 Garden seeds 8 . 00 

7 Express on seeds . 85 

7 2 milk pails 2 . 00 

7 Household . 86 

7 Repairing dIow 1 . 20 



$72.11 



For a simple, easy scheme of bookkeeping such a record is very 
satisfactory, and if followed out to the end of the year will give all 
business transactions. But if one wishes to know the aggregate income 
from any separate enterprise, it is necessary to go through the records 
and pick all items which apply and add them. While this record gives 
the total receipts it does not classify them. 

Cash-book Items Recorded by En erprises. — To avoid recopying and 
to provide an ever-ready record, the recommendation is often made to 
open a separate account for each enterprise for which data are desired, 
and therein enter all debits or credits {i.e., sales or purchases) directly 
to the account concerned. 

The so-called "daybook" or "journal" will serve as a cash book for 
this purpose. The requirements are that there be a place for dates on 
left-hand side, a broad space for recording details, and columns I'uled for 
dollars and cents on the right. 

Cash items are entered directly in their respective accounts. 

Table 146. — Example of Cash-book Record by Enterprises 



(year) 


Dairy 


Received 


April 9 
9 


2 cows to C. Brown 


$ 88.00 


1 yearling to Smith 


19.00 


15 


Milk and cream 


114.25 $221.25 








(year) 


Dairy 


Paid 


April 2 


1 ton cottonseed meal 


$ 35.00 


2 


2 milk pails 


2.00 


10 


1 cow from A. Johnson 


57 50 


10 


One-half ton bran 


15.50 $110.00 









FARM BOOKKEEPING 



365 



Form illustrating special-column cash book; items entered direct to separate accounts. 

Receipts 



(year) Item 


Da,iry Poultry 


Crops 


General 


April 2 
3 
4 


2 yearlings to Jones 

2 tons of hay to Brown 

14 dozen eggs, at 25 (^ '. . 


$35.00 


$3.50 


$32.00 














Expenditures 


(year) 


Item 


Dairy 


Poultry 


1 
Crops General 


April 2 
2 

7 


1 ton wheat bran 


$28.00 
2.50 




$10.00 




10 bu. seed oats, at $1 

2 bags chicken wheat 





The Use of a Bank Book as a Cash Record. — Another cash-book 
system is the "bank-book" or "check" method. By this method all 
farm funds are passed through the bank account. When funds are de- 
posited in the bank a duplicate deposit slip is made out, on the back of 
which is recorded the articles for which the cash is received. Likewise 
when checks are drawn the articles for which the money is expended are 
noted on the check-book stub, or upon special checks bearing on their 
face a notation of the object for which drawn. This is a very simple 
scheme and has much to recommend it. 

The duplicate deposit slips and check stubs, carefully preserved, form 
a complete financial record, and the records automatically agree with the 
cash balance. There is one inconvenience encountered in this method. 
There are many expenditures of a few cents here and there, and it is both 
impracticable and unbusinesslike to draw a check for each of these petty 
amounts. There are several means of overcoming this difficulty. One is 
to open an account at the store for these petty items and draw a check 
periodically to pay for them. The items can then be classified on the 
check stub. Another means is to adopt what is known as the "petty- 
cash" method. A small sum of money is set aside to pay these minor 
items and charged to a petty cash account. From this the little expenses 
are paid, and when the sum is depleted a check is drawn to cover the total 
of items paid out of it, the items being classified on its stub, and the 
check is then cashed and the money put back in the petty cash fund. 

The Farm Diary Method of Records. — The method known as "the 
farm dairy method" consists of using a book with a separate page for 
the records of each day throughout the year. The main objection to it is 



366 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



that the records must be "posted" as described in the discussion of the 
first method given, but it has the considerable advantage of providing 
a definite system for the recording of all the miscellaneous happenings 
which are of interest and value. 

The farm diary provides a simple and concise way of recording 
happenings. In the course of time this will constitute a history of the 
farm. The records should be written in day by day, giving ample infor- 
mation and memoranda which may prove valuable for future reference. 




To«^.»^ 




'. •> I o c , 




.„,-.^.. .-- ,,: ^■^^'.--< 


>•-,-■ ,"-.^> -, 


rzd^, ^. 




/n -^i, eiy ei 


l^ 


Uatoc- Sc^i't-o-k-^'o-i < 


-D«iyi-, 


^.^d ^ Vfo.k^ 


f-^C 


roH. 


•1&«-^ 


C-^M. 


/ 


o 






1 





Fig. 71. — Example of loose leaf system with home ruled sheets for combined diary 
and labor account. In this form, cash accounts could replace labor segregation, or 
the double page used to record in addition, cash transactions, materials and feeds 
records. 



Condition of the weather, time of planting, breeding, division of fields, 
sales, purchases, loans, attendance at conventions, valuable recipes, etc. 
are proper subjects for entry. 

Most diaries contain a page for each day, the upper half providing 
space for a record of the daily labor, the lower a place to record cash 
transaction, while other items of a personal or historic interest may be 
added. Inventories and blanks for further records are provided. This 
form of recording requires rather more labor in summarizing the year's 
records, but this is not usually considered a serious objection because the 
time of closing the books ordinarily comes at a slack period of the farm 
year. 

A diary is adapted to keeping cost accounting records when informa- 
tion is wanted on only a few enterprises. In writing up the diary each 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 



367 



day it will take only a little additional time and effort to enter the hours 
and minutes spent in work on the crop or stock enterprise under consider- 
ation and the amount and value of seed, fertilizer, feed sacks, boxes, etc. 
used in producing the product. The possibilities of a diary as a cost 
accounting system are limited, however, and while it may serve as a start- 
ing point it is likely to be eventually replaced by a better method. 

Thursday, Sept. 14, 





J^on. [I Mortm^ 


Mcun 


JV,/I J**-^^4 


J^,,^ 


-/ ■ / 








— Safi&iZ/^»4^^'^ -rr-^^J^c^ .o^^^^jf,^/ 


f' 




/2 




/ ^ f^ f 










clcut^ 18 T^^tJi^ ^ea^ ay,^ 2^00"^ 










<3^>»*»»*<!a<V.-«t/ tt^ .^2^^^*^ 










y(U Ar.^ . L\ 6>^. y(^yi^..c^ yi^ 










yi^'yU^ctr-^ t-^^^^^y^.f.fr,^^^t «M T^Lty'.c^i-t^ro 










a-t^ ■^. ^OfJ ..-»*r^*,/ a>iy -7^^^^/ ^ 










,dt^^..t,£^ 










Qi-l ^. . y J^^.^ ^^ V KSt^.J^ 










(jU.t^ -r-^rj^Plf iS^'j^ p^^J'^^^ f. 






































>i -L -n/^Z7<l za / y^c^-f^rrr? (^ 


/fece/yfd 


/byd A//- 


(■^ f^-^ ^^f^ 0> '\^ ^^ 


e 


<}4 






-> -dA W'/A^ ^ ^^<^ 


/ 


ffl 
















G>r,^^J /f^,Juc^r^%/^ jz^y /2£^C^^^^J~ 










Z4^ A^Aa. ^ ^. P.-T- ^ 






iff) 


DO 


2. Frt^^ -lyr-Cj-^ -^a.t^ (^ y *^ n 






z 


<ro 










n2.vO 











































Fig. 72. — The use of a diary for recording cashbook items. 

Example of Diary Items. — The diary has an added value if the records 
give a personal touch. Note the human interest in diary entries such 
as these : 

May 3 — River pumping plant suction pipe collapsed. 

May 4— Sold 100 175 lb. shoats and 110 100 lb. shoats to W. Pattison at 16^. 
May 11 — Cholera has broken out in the unvaccinated 30-lb. pigs (167 in lot). About 
45 deaths. First diagnosed by veterinarians as pneumonia. 

Grain filling and if cool for a week prospects are for a good crop. 
May 19 — Stemmed cholera 167 lot — 100 gone first however. 

Apricots beginning to color. 

Suggestion : Try 20 acres Mariout barley next year. 



368 FARM MANAGEMENT 

June 23 — Apricot harvest is on. 

Had to serve notice to Richmond to vacate cottage and not later than June 30. 
Next year harvest all grain when in hard dough stage account (1) danger floods 

(2) weeds bad in late ripening grain (3) sand makes hard pulling (4) high cost of 

harvest (Heading $3.00 per acre) (5) broken heads when grain is dead ripe, especially 

during high winds of August. 

Expect 4,000 sacks barley and 700 wheat. 

Aug. Q^Hereafter bull calves are to be kept only when feed is plentiful, otherwise 
vealed. Heifer calves to be raised. Hereford bull is getting so heavy 
must be sold and a lighter weight animal obtained. 

Aug. 30 — Growth of sunflowers, and weeds after grain harvest, with resulting drain on 
moisture indicated wisdom of working land immediately after harvest. 
Receipts from stubble would be more than offset by greater grain crops 
from better and earlier preparation and saving of moisture. The 
Island is a sea of yellow sunflowers 6 ft. high, while the 91-acre piece is 
another bower. (Make good dove hunting in fall). 

Sept. 10 — Order blue mare killed. Badly cut by wire in stifle and is no good for 
breeding. 

Nov. 8 — This year teaches us need of more green feed Nov. 1 to Mar. 1. Concen- 
trate on starting foxtail, early, and growing pumpkins and silage. 

Nov. 26 — On return from trip to city, superintendent served notice had a better job. 

Dec. 5 — Succeeded in getting new superintendent. 

Dec. 26 — Changed superintendents. 

Feb. 10 — Place in upheaval due to flu. Harland, fine chap, died at 9:45. Saw him 
at 3:30, cheerful, wilUng, all round worker. Too bad. Force played 
out nursing. Many sick. 

Feb. 26 — Things once more coming on in great shape. 

The Annual Statement 

Description of the Annual Statement. — The annual statement is a 
bringing together and summing up of the year's business, to exhibit what 
has been accompHshed in a financial way. It shows the resources and 
liabilities, the cash receipts and expenditures, the profits and losses, the 
net profit or loss, and the net worth. It enables the proprietor to analyze 
his business with considerable accuracy and to trace the sources of profits 
and losses. 

The simplest statement follows the use of cash book and inventory: 
the more complicated, the use of detailed accounts for each department. 

The information obtainable from cash book and inventory is indi- 
cated in the following example: 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 



369 



Table 147. — Annual Statement Made up from Ina^entory Totals and Cash 

Account*! 



Inventories (physical or tangible only 


) 






Value 




April 1, 
1918 


April 1, 
1919 


Increase 


Decrease 


Real estate 


$ 9,600.00$ 9.600.00 


$428.00 

147.60 

49.87 




Live stock 


1 , 185 . 00 

1,633.60 

648.00 

7.58 


1,613.00 

1,498.25 

795.60 

57.45 




Machinery and tools 


$135.25 


Farm produce 




Purchased feeds and supplies 








Totals 

Subtracting the lesser 


$13,074.08 


$13,564.30 
$13,074.08 


$625.47 
135.25 


$135 . 25 






Balance, net increase (a farm receipt). . 




$ 490.22 


$ 490.22 





Farm Receipts 

Financial receipts 

Cash receipts 

Add value of current year sales not yet re- 
ceived in cash (see financial inventory) . . . 



Subtract payment of last year's bills included 
in cash receipts 



Net financial receipts applicable to this year. . . 

Property receipts: 

Net increase in inventory (a property receipt) . 

Personal benefit receipts: 

Value of food supplies furnished family 439 . 74 

Value of fuel furnished family 58 . 00 

Renting value of farm dwelling 180.00 

Total personal benefit receipts 

Total farm receipts 

Farm Expenditures 
Financial expenditures : 

Cash expenditures " 1 , 703 . 41 

Add amount of current year purchases not yet 

paid in cash 200 . 00 

Total financial expenditures 

Property expenditures: (none, there was a net 
inventory increase; not a decrease) 
24 



$2,235.40 

68.00 

2,303.40 

142.00 
490.22 



677.74 



1,903.41 



2,161.40 



3,329.36 



370 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Personally furnished expenditures: 

Value of family labor on farm work 110.00 

Value of board furnished laborers 60 . 00 

Total personally furnished expenditures. . . . 170.00 

Total farm expenditures 2, 073. 41 



Net farm income 1 ,255 . 95 

Income earned by capital and labor: 

Interest at 5 per cent on total value of physical 

inventory, April 1, 1918 653.70 

Deduct interest paid on mortgage 200. 00 



453 . 70 
Value of farmer's labor (estimated) 600. 00 



Total deduction for use of capital and labor. . 1 ,053.70 



Net farm profit $ 202 . 25 

Determining Inventory Changes. — The first step is to determine the net 
inventory increase or decrease, which is then carried below as a property 
receipt or a property expenditure, accordingly as it is found to be an 
increase or a decrease. 

It will be noticed that in arriving at the inventory increase Table 147 
does not include the accounts receivable, accounts payable, or cash on 
hand. This is because the money which is owed the farm has been added 
to the cash receipts, that which is owed by the farm to the cash expendi- 
tures, and the difference in cash on hand is reflected in the difference 
between cash receipts and expenditures. Thus, while, the complete 
inventory is properly used when there is no other record, only the physical 
inventory is used when figuring farm income and profit. The accounts 
payable and receivable are added to the receipts and expenditures because 
they really are such, and actually pertain to the year for which the state- 
ment is prepared. These points must be thoroughly grasped, and they 
are worthy of study. 

Adjusting Cash Items. — To determine the financial receipts and 
expenditures properly belonging to the year in question, an adjustment 
of the cash receipts and expenditures must be made by taking out all 
items included among them but not rightly pertaining to this year, and 
by adding in all items of the year's business not yet settled for. 

One item of this adjustment will require some explanation, namely, 
the deducting of $200 interest paid on mortgage. This is done to prevent 
duplication, for if interest on the entire value of the physical property 
is deducted in ascertaining the net farm profit, and, in addition, the 
interest actually paid on the mortgage covering a part of the same prop- 
erty, a double interest charge is made on the part covered by the 



FARM BOOKKEEPING 371 

mortgage. The interest paid on the mortgage has already been included 
as a deduction from income, as it appears in the total farm expenditures. 

This duplication is avoided, as shown in Table 147, by deducting 
the amount of interest actually paid from the interest as calculated on 
the value of the physical assets. This process closely follows the facts, 
as the capital, in this case, on which interest charges should be figured is 
not the total value of the property, but the remainder, or "equity" as it 
is sometimes called, after the amount of the mortgage is deducted. 

Determining Labor Income. — While the term "labor income" is of 
value to the economist in studying the relative profitableness of different 
farms, it is not generally used in farm bookkeeping, since only a single 
farm is being studied by its operator. If it is desired to compare one's 
labor income with those in published data on farm economics, it can be 
determined by figuring the net farm income left after allowing for interest 
on the investment. This labor income can readily be gotten from a 
statement like Table 147 by adding the estimate of the value of the 
farmer's services ($600) to the net farm profit ($202.25). If there should 
be a net farm loss, instead of a profit, the amount of the loss should be 
deducted from the estimated value of the farmer's services. If the loss 
is larger than this estimate, the latter should be deducted from this 
loss. In this case there would be what is termed a "minus labor income," 
which means that the year's results have not even paid the proper interest 
on the investment by the amount of the minus labor income. 

Steps in Making up an Annual Statement. — From the preceding, 
it should be evident that to make up an annual statement from the cash 
book and inventory involves determinations as follows: 

1. The year's gain as shown by the inventory. 

2. The total personal and household expenses as shown by the cash 
book. 

3. Payments for interest and outside investments, as shown by the 
cash book. 

4. Value of house and supplies furnished by the farm. 

The resultant total from these four steps constitutes farm income. 

If from the figure so obtained is deducted interest on the average 
investment at the general prevailing rate, the difference will be family 
income. 

To find out the farmer's labor income there must be deducted from 
this family income the value of any unpaid family labor other than that 
of the operator. 

To find out percentage returns on the investment, from farm income, 
the estimated value of the farmer's work is deducted. Any sum re- 
maining is then calculated as so many per cent returns on the average 
farm investment. 



CHAPTER XVII 
FARM COST ACCOUNTING^o 

The system described in the last chapter aims to show the status 
of a farm business as a whole. Such a system is entirely satisfactory 
when one is first starting to keep books. But as familiarity develops 
there usually comes with it a desire to know more of what the different 
departments are doing — to keep account of some particular crop or class 
of live stock. 

Function of Farm Cost Accounting. — The function of farm cost 
accounting is to supply information to the business farmer who wishes 
to know how much he is making or losing upon his operations each 
year, and how much the gains or losses amount to for each crop or 
class of live stock, so that increase in profits may be obtained through 
intelligent reorganization of the farm activities. 

Accounts by Departments. — Whereas farm bookkeeping considers 
the farm as a whole, and takes no cognizance of receipts or expenditures 
as affecting any particular part of the business, cost accounting keeps 
separate accounts for each part of the business. That is, each industry 
is considered as a business by itself. 

Thus a farm devoted to whole milk production, raising and fattening of hogs, 
growing of grain for farm use with a surplus for sale, and production of alfalfa, will 
consider the dairy, swine, grain, and alfalfa as four separate businesses, charging each 
with expenditures and placing to the credit of each all of its production. Or a farmer 
specializing in fruit of two or three varieties like peaches, apples, and pears, with 
poultry, and truck crops such as tomatoes, cabbages, and potatoes, would follow the 
affairs of each department by itself throughout the year and note what demands and 
what receipts fell to the peach, apple, pear, poultry, and truck departments. 

Accounts by Operations. — The keeping of accounts may be for a 
somewhat different purpose, as for example a desire to investigate the 
costs of the various operations involved in producing the product. A 
grower of fruit may (and many do) desire to determine where his various 
expenses occur. The orange growers, for instance, of southern California, 
make a special effort to keep track of the various costs of picking, packing, 
marketing, fumigating, manuring, cultivating, and all charges entering 
into the growing and disposing of the crop. 

Farm Cost Accounting Similar to Commercial Cost Accounting. — 
Cost accounting for the farm is exactly parallel to what large manufac- 
turing companies do in order to learn whether they are making profits 
on their different products. The farmer wants to know whether his 

372 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 373 

wheat pays, whether his cows pay, or his orchard. These are some of the 
questions a set of farm cost accounts will settle. 

Cost Accounting Introduces Estimates. — No cost accounting can be 
absolutely exact. Commercial cost accounting and farm cost accounting 
are precisely alike in this respect. Both are based partly on estimates 
and partly on ascertainable facts, and both approach exactitude in 
proportion to the accuracy of these estimates. It is therefore impor- 
tant to make the estimates as accurate as possible rather than be satisfied 
with rough approximations. As the work is carried on year by year and 
experience is gained, greater precision in estimating is attained, with 
correspondingly nearer correctness in the results of the cost accounts. 

On the other hand it is not wi^e to spend much time with refinements 
in methods of bookkeeping that are designed to check to the last cent. 
In fact, attempts to find insignificant errors often disgust inexperienced 
persons with the whole question of accounting. 

A Favorable Time to Start Accounts. — Accounts may be started any 
time after the last crop is harvested in the fall and before the first crop 
operations are started in the spring. They should be begun on the first 
work day of some month, but the exact date will depend upon the geo- 
graphical location of the farm and the nature of the business or type of 
farming in practice. The time should be as late as possible in order that 
there may be the smallest quantities of last year's crops on hand to be 
inventoried. However, the date should be early enough to allow suffi- 
cient time to close the year's accounts, work out results, plan the next 
year's business, and open the new accounts before the spring crop work 
begins. In a large majority of cases the best date will fall between Jan- 
uary 1 and April 1. For a tenant the date of taking an inventory and 
opening the accounts will, of course, correspond to the date of his lease. 

Classes of Records Needed for a Complete Set of Farm Cost Accounts. 
In order to have a complete set of farm cost accounts four classes of 
records are necessary : 

1. An inventory at the beginning and end of the year, 

2. An account of all money paid out or received, and of all purchases 
or sales on credit. 

3. Records of feeds consumed, crop supplies used, and crop yields. 

4. Records of all work done by men, horses, tractor, or other power 
during the year. 

Present Status of Crops. — The items to be considered in keeping track 
of any crop must cover all previous work done up to the time the account 
is started, and the value of all materials used, such as seed, manure, or 
fertilizer. From the time the account is opened, careful record must be 
kept of all labor expended upon the crop, whether horse or man, all seed, 
fertilizer, spray, or other material required, use of implements, buildings, 
and management, a fair charge for the use of land, any other costs incident 



374 FARM MANAGEMENT 

to the production of the crop, and interest on operating capital and value 
of crop until utilized. The crop is to be credited with everything it 
produces at market, or farm, value, if it has such, or at cost if there 
is no readily obtainable market price, including any manure values 
remaining. 

Present Status of Live Stock. — In the stock departments a full inventory 
of the stock on hand, together with feed, is taken. After the account is 
opened, future items will cover all expenditures for feed, including pas- 
ture, bedding, additional stock, labor (horse and man, including super- 
vision), use of buildings and special equipment, insurance, interest on the 
investment, interest on the operating capital, and depreciation. Credits 
will consist of all products yielded, whether sold or used, determined in 
the same way as for crops. 

Items to be Covered in Crop Cost Accounting. — The items to be 
considered in a cost account with a crop can be summarized as follows: 

Charges 

Inventory of amount of work, seed, etc., if any, previous to beginning 
the account. 

Part of manure charge from previous crops. 

Value of manure applied for this crop. 

Commercial fertilizers, all or part to this crop. 

Seed, twine, crates, chemicals, etc. 

All man labor, including supervision. 

All horse labor. 

Use of machinery. 

Use of buildings for storage of crops. 

Use of land. 

Overhead. 

Other miscellaneous costs. 

Credits to Crop 

All products sold, used by the family, fed on the farm, saved for seed, 
or used for bedding. 

Probable value of manure left in soil but charged to crop. 

Inventory, or amount on hand at end of year. 

Items to be Covered in Live-stock Cost Accounting. — The items to 
consider in a cost-accounting record of live stock are as follows: 

Charges 

Inventory, or total value of stock at beginning of year. 
Live stock purchased. 



FABM COST ACCOUNTING 375 

Feed and bedding used. 

Milk fed to stock. 

Pasture. 

Interest on investment in live stock. 

All man labor, including supervision. 

All horse labor. 

Use of machinery. 

Use of buildings, for shelter. 

Overhead. 

Miscellaneous costs, insurance, etc. 

Credits 

Sale of live stock and live-stock products. 

Skim milk, etc., fed to other stock. 

Products used by the family. 

Value of manure. 

Inventory at end of the year. 

Inventories in Cost Accounting. — The inventory record is handled 
similarly to the method already described for "Farm Bookkeeping." 

In cost accounting, items carried in a general cash book, such as 
described in the preceding chapter, are transferred to the various depart- 
ment accounts. Some systems, in order to avoid this so-called " posting," 
make the entries direct to the account involved. 

The Cash Book in Cost Accounting. — For these records, a book called 
by stationers a ''broad day book " or "journal " can be used. The require- 
ments are that there be a place for a date on the left-hand side of the 
page, a broad space in the middle of the page in which to write explana- 
tions, and columns ruled for dollars and cents at the right. Two pages 
facing each other are taken for each account. The name of the account 
is written at the top of the page. The left-hand page is marked ' ' Receipts ' ' 
and is used only to record credits to the account. The right-hand page 
is marked "Expenses" and is used only for charges against the account. 
At the end of the year this book becomes the complete account book, for 
in it at that time are entered the items from the other two record books as 
described later. 

A separate account is kept with real estate, each crop grown, each 
class of animals, machinery, labor, interest, each person dealt with on 
credit, and such other headings as may be found necessary or convenient. 

The following classification of account headings will give some idea 
of the number and kinds of accounts it may be necessary to keep : 



376 FARM MANAGEMENT 



Table 148. — Classification of Accounts in Cost Keeping 



Crop Accounts 


Labor Accounts 


Corn 


Man labor 


Oats 


Horses 


Peas 


Equipment 


Hay 


Tractor 


Potatoes 


Truck 


Orchard 




Buckwheat 




Rye 




Wheat 




General Accounts 




Real estate 




Feed and suppHes 




Interest 




. Manure 




Loss and gain 




Personal 




Household 




Commissary 




Office 





Live Stock 
Accounts 

Cows 
Hogs 
Poultry 
Pasture 



Next Year's Crop 
Wheat, etc. 



To these are often added accounts with each firm or person with whom 
credit dealings are carried on. 

Properly Classifying Items. — Care must be given to classifying items 
in their proper accounts. Such matters for instance as repairing build- 
ings, building fences, constructing irrigation gates, purchase of tools 
and implements, should be charged to one general account and not to any 
special industry or operation. They may be included in the record of 
permanent improvements, or else of general expense, of equipment 
expense, of investment, or in some similar account. This is particularly 
necessary if the operator is just starting in business, as the first inventory 
might show only lands and buildings. Purchase of work stock, imple- 
ments, etc., should then be entered in a general account under some such 
name as those suggested. Other accounts which might be carried on 
are family expenses, which will cover meats, groceries, clothing, amuse- 
ment, travel, etc. 

How the Cash-book Entries Are Made. — At the end of each day, or 
as often as time permits or necessity requires, all moneys received or 
paid out since the last entries were made should be entered to the various 
accounts, crediting all money received and charging all money paid out. 

Thus if a farmer makes a trip to town on March 4 and sells 10 dozen eggs at 40 jf 
per dozen and 7 lb. of butter at 50^ per pound, and if on the same trip he purchases 
a sack of flour for $2.50, a milk pail for $1.00, and a pair of overalls for $2.50, he will, 
on the evening of that day, record these items, in the following manner: First, the 
poultry account is turned to, and in the left-hand column and page the following entry 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 377 

is made: March 4, 10 dozen eggs at 40 f!, $4.00. Next, the dairy account is opened 
and on the left-hand space is recorded: March 4, 7 lb. butter at 50^, $3.50. On the 
right-hand space of this account will also be recorded: March 4, one milk pail, $1.00. 
The household account is next turned to, and in the right-hand space, the entry is 
made: March 4, one sack flour, $2.50. Finally the personal account is turned to and 
the entry made: March 4, one pair overalls, $2.50. These records when so made are 
there for all time and need never be copied or transferred. At the end of the year it 
will take only a short time to add up the figures on both sides of each account, and the 
result will be the total receipts and expenditures for each enterprise, and likewise for 
household and personal expense. 

Indexing Accounts. — Finding the account wanted is made easier 
by indexing the books in the following manner: A piece of adhesive 
tape about 13-^ in. long is bent double and stuck on the edge of the page 
in such a manner that it projects about 3^^ in. On this projection is 
written the name of the account kept on that page. A piece of tape is 
put on each account, arranged one below the other along the edge of 
the book so that all may be seen at the same time. Prepared paper tabs, 
suitable for this purpose, can be purchased from most stationers. Mend- 
ing tape is much better than ordinary adhesive tape. 

Feed Records in Cost Accounting. — Feed records are for the purpose 
of recording the use made of either farm-raised or purchased feeds by 
the different enterprises, so that proper charges may be made for use or 
proper credits for production. A careful estimate based on weighing 
feeds one day in a month is usually sufficient to give a satisfactory idea 
of what is being consumed. 

Feed records should be clear and concise with a minimum of recording 
and a maximum of ease in finding totals. 

A suggestion or two is given in the following: 

Charging Feed Purchases. — All feed bought is charged directly against 
the accounts of the animals for which it was secured, the same as any 
other cash item. If the hog feed should run out some day and a bag of 
cow feed taken for the hogs, the entries should be made in the record 
book just as if the cows had sold this feed and the hogs had bought it. 

The value of all home-grown feeds consumed must be charged to the 
live stock accounts and credited to the crop producing them. This can 
be done at convenient stated periods, as each week or each month. As 
home-grown crops are fed out an estimate must be made of the quantities 
fed to horses, cows, and other stock, and their accounts charged with 
the values thereof, credit being given the crop accounts. A day's 
rations may be weighed or estimated once a month or oftener and the 
proper proportion of the total feed consumed, based on these weighings 
and the number of days fed, may then be duly charged and credited. 
This method will give a reasonable approach to accuracy if weights are 
taken fairly often. When the different classes of animals are fed from 
separate grain bins and haymows there will be no difficulty in keeping the 



378 FARM MANAGEMENT 

feed accounts separate, if a record is kept of the quantities put in each 
at harvest time and fed out from each thereafter. 

Where concentrates are purchased in large quantities to be fed to 
several classes of animals, the charge may be made to "Feed and Supplies " 
account and a record kept in the feed room of the quantities fed to 
each class of animals. Proper charges can be made on the basis of this 
record and the "Feed and Supplies" account credited. 

Crediting Production. — At the time of thrashing or at the close of 
harvesting a crop, the total yield may be entered as a memorandum on 
the receipts side of the proper crop account, but the values are not yet 
to be carried to the money column. Yields of hay, straw, etc., can be 
estimated with fair approximation by ineasuring bins and haymows or by 
counting the number of loads drawn and estimating the actual weight. 
In all cases allowance for shrinkage should be made. The money values 
are to be entered as the crop is sold or transferred to the animals. Quan- 
tities sold will be known from the weighing bills or otherwise. 

Manure Accounts. — When barnyard manure is hauled out to the 
fields it should not at that time be charged directly to the crop accounts 
and credited to the stock account. A "Manure" account is provided to 
carry all manure charges until the end of the season. The entries in this 
account should give the crop to which applied, the kind of manure, the 
number of tons or loads hauled out each day, where produced, stock to be 
credited, and the value of the manure. At the end of the year the manure 
account is closed by charging each crop account in a single item for its 
proportion of the total value of the manure applied thereon, together 
with the cost of applying, as explained hereafter, and likewise crediting 
the proper stock accounts. 

Labor Records for Cost Accounts. — Work records as used in cost 
accounting are for the purpose of recording the amount of work spent in 
carrying on any enterprise and the time when the work is done. It is 
usually of minor importance who does the work. Labor records designed 
to show work segregations are rather varied. Two or three are shown 
below. They are self-explanatory. 

Determining Ratio. — In converting hours to money, the rate is based 
on the total spent for wages, board, lodging, and other privileges, divided 
by the total number of hours worked. 

To determine the cost of horse labor, one must know the approximate 
cost of keeping the horse during different periods of the year. Cost- 
accounting records show that the cost of horse labor varies from 6 to 16^ 
an hour. The rate depends on the number of horses kept, the cost of 
keeping them, and the average number of hours work done per day. 
On most farms the amount of work done by horses is much greater at 
some seasons than at others. In such cases the cost per hour of horse 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 379 

labor varies greatly from month to month. The best plan is to determine 
the average for the year and use the result in figuring costs. 

Care in Making Required. — Labor records require some care as 
they must cover the various activities of the day, such operations not 
directly chargeable as chores or building fence or repairing windmill, and 
time for both horses and men. There are several methods of keeping 
records, depending on the kind of business, but the same essentials are 
incident to all, i.e., a place to note total hours spent on each enterprise 
daily, and, if desired, a supplementary statement covering the character 
of the operations performed. 

Terms of Reporting Labor. — All labor records should be in terms of 
hours, since during the year length of a working day varies. 

Convenient Form for Recording. — For the Work Record a book like 
the Financial Record book is convenient, although any form is satis- 
factory that will serve to convey the desired information in a concise and 
advantageous way. There must be two double columns at the right of 
the page. This book must be indexed in the manner already described, 
with one or more pages headed to cover the crop, field, or department for 
which the account is kept, including a general or chores page for items not 
possible of immediate segregation. The number of the latter items should 
be held down to as few as possible. In this book no separate pages are 
used for charges and credits and no entries made in terms of dollars and 
cents. In the first double column at the right-hand side of the page are 
entered hours and minutes of man labor, and in the second are entered 
hours and minutes of horse labor. These headings are placed at the top 
of each double column. This book is to receive simply a record of the 
work done on the farm during the year, classified according to the enter- 
prise for which it was done, while it also gives the date and number of 
hours for each operation. Where a tractor is in use, the tractor hours 
may be carried in the narrow space immediately preceding the man-labor 
columns. 

How the Work Record Entries Are Made. — The method of making 
entries in the Work Record will be understood from the following exam- 
ple: The date is May 1, The work done this day is, aside from chores, 
drilling oats 6 hr, with two horses; plowing for corn 8 hr, with three horses; 
repairing plow 2 hr. The entries are made as follows: The "oats" 
account is found, May 1 is written in the left-hand column, the single 
word "drilling" written in the broad space in the middle of the page, and 
the figure 6 entered under man-hours. Since two horses were used for 
6 hr., the figure 12 should be entered under horse-hours. In the same 
way, on turning to the "Corn" accounts, "May 1, plowing 8 (under 
man-hours) 24 (under horse-hours) " is entered. Turning to the 
"Machinery" accounts, "May 1, repairing plow, 2 " (under man-hours) 



380 



FARM MANAGEMENT 











MONTHLY WORK REPORT 






















Month of J'w^e 


1911 






1 




Corn 


Wheat 


Oa(s jPo(a<oci 


Bay 








Borses 


Cattle 


Bogs 


mise 


Total 




UllD|flol>« 


U.qIBoiso 


M.D 


£o^'m..L„. 


Ktv HoI«o 


U>ii Huis^ 




Umi>'ao><« 


M. o'er. .8 


U.p'h.'I.s 


m.Jb„,.. 


UioHotw 


U.DHofe 


1 


5 


10 










20 


hO 


















7i4 




5h 




1 








33 


50 


2 


10 


20 










10 


20 


















a 




s 


9 


2H 




2 


2 


3iH 

32 


M 
38 


3 


9 


18 










9Vi 


19 


















IH 




6H 




1 




4H 


1 


Sunday 4 


































3H 




sa 




ly. 






i 


lOH 


i 


5 






















































6 






















































7 






















































8 



































































^^ 


^~~ 




' 


^^"^ 




^^^ 


^"^ 


^~^ 






^~" 






1— — 


'-— 


I— -^ 


'— ^ 


^--■ 




U_J 


1— » 









































~ 
















29 






















































30 






















































31 






















































Total. 










































— 


















___ 


^^ 




^_ 


Hi^ 


^__ 




^^ 


^^ 


^_ 




__ 


^^ 






^_ 


^_ 


L_ 




__ 






__l 



Fig. 73. — Form for recording daily and monthlj^ labor expended for different de- 
partments. 



Le 


bor Record — Man and Horse 






1 


ME 


=11 an days HD=Horse days Month of 


,._| 


ot 

Mo 


Total Time 


Charge to Acc't | 


Lairy 


Sivine 


Alfalfa 








1 


MD 


II D 


KD 


IID 


KT 


HD 


Ml) 


HD 


Mil 1 HD 


JID 


HD 


MD 


HD 


MD 


HD 


1 


S 


20 


10 





2 





5 


10 


etc 














•1 


6 


10 


8 





■4 


i 


10 


U 


















3 


8 


20 


12 


2 


i 


2 


12 


12 


















4 


8 


IS 


10 





2 





5 


10 


















5 


G 


10 


10 





2 



























6 


etc 


etc 


etc 


etc 


etc 


etc 


etc 


etc 


















7 


































8 


































9 
































' 




1 


































^ ' 




—^ 


































28 


































29 


































30 


































31 


































Totalfc 


2100 


790 


150 


100 


30 


60 


70 


120 


etc 
















Cost par llan day 


Cost per Horse day | 


Pav roll ifinnn rnst 

per 
BoaicLaod Ledging JiOO day 1 


Fee 
Car 
Rep 
Vet 
Ext 


I .il25 Cost 1 


s ol 
airs, 
-rina 
as 


barns 


8 re'' 


.£ztr 


as WO $2J.l,\ 


ry ~ 


• .ft/? 7<i 




Total HSOO 1 


Total W4i 1 


1 


1 



Fig. 74. — Home-made labor record showing daily and monthly totals and unit costs. 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 



381 



is entered. When this has been done the work entry for the day is com- 
plete, it will never have to be "posted" or written again. 

Method of Recording Routine Work or "Chores." — For chores special 
pages are to be ruled in the front or back of the Work Record as follows : 

Routine Work Esiimates in Man Hours 



Date 


Horses 


Cows 


Poultry 


Hogs 


Hours 


Min- 
utes 


Hours 


Min- 
utes 


Hours 


Min- 
utes 


Hours 


Min- 
utes 


1918 
May 1 


2 

2 


20 
40 


4 
5 


15 
5 


1 


30 


1 

1 


10 


May 15 


30 






Average for May 


2 30 


4 


40 




45 


1 


20 


Total for May 31 days 


77 30 144 i 40 

1 


23 


15 


41 


20 



Note. — If horses are used in the chore work, extra columns must be ruled under 
each heading where they are used to provide a place for the hours and minutes of 
horse labor. 

Reporting Chores. — It may be somewhat more satisfactory to enter the 
time spent in chores every day, but, if chore time is fairly uniform, 
estimates made two or three times a month will be all that is required. If 
the time spent on chores changes greatly at any time, for instance when 
the cows are turned out on pasture in the spring, or when additional 
stock is purchased, entries should be made so that these changes may 
be taken into account. On the basis of the estimates of chore labor 
the total time for the month is figured under each heading. The monthly 
totals may be charged to the proper accounts once a month, or the total 
time for the year may be found and charged as a single item just before 
the books are closed at the end of the year. When any special work is 
done on live stock accounts, as for instance when sick animals are cared 
for, it should be charged direct to the proper account, no attempt being 
made to allow for it in the chore estimates. 

Recording Labor. — A sheet a month serves to record the labor, when 
the following system is used. Spaces are provided for the different 
enterprises, columns for both man-hours and horse-hours, and for sum- 
maries. This record is easy to keep and useful. (See Fig. 75.) 

The next form illustrates a method by which the labor records 
are carried out to the utmost detail. It combines the record of each 
laborer with the enterprise concerned. Usually a statement of the work 
done is of more value than the record of who does it, unless considerable 
variation in rates occurs. (See Fig. 76.) 



382 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Foreman's Weekly Report of Work Done. — This form is used by a 
corporation employing 2,000 farm hands, to keep track of work being done. 
Its inauguration resulted in reducing the payroll 10 per cent, in encour- 
aging competition among foremen, and in enhancing feeling that good 
work would be known and appreciated. 

Supplementary Records. — Materials Record serves to record the use 
of various supplies and materials used by the various enterprises. This 
record is needed only when supplies are drawn from a common source. 




Fig. 75. — Example of a time book. 



Can be segregated bj' accounts or bj' individual 
workers. 



Purchases solely for a department are covered in the cash book, but lumber, 
or salt, or feed, drawn from bulk purchases, must be taken care of, and the 
materials record is for the purpose of preventing the overlooking of such 
items. -Figure 78 is suggestive: 

Production Records are necessary in keeping track of output from 
various crop or stock enterprises. No special form is needed. The 
amount of detail desired will govern the kind of record to keep. 

A simple record is illustrated in Fig. 79. 

The Time Book is a record of the various men on the payroll, showing 
periods worked, rates, totals due, payments made. It is a personal 
record. Sometimes the time book carries data for use in cost accounting, 
by listing operations as well as time worked. (See Fig. 80.) 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 



383 



Regular Worker's Daily Time Sheet 

DayofVleek.''^/^^^t,^ Dak ^^(,^<^ 



v. S. Department of Agriculture 
in cooperation viitli 



/o 



KINO OF WORK. 




00. 
30- 

00. 

so— 

00- 

30- 
1.00 
80- 
()0 
30- 
00. 
30— 
00 
30- 
00 
30- 
00 
30 
00 
30- 
00 

30— 
00 
30 
00 



— ^(iyhX. yvUjZ^K, -ti 4?6l^tW- 



(^.^cric^-uuc^ <^?-»»-*<^ / 






30 

00— 
30— 

00-^ — 






^?7t^..c-y(L,.<:'tt^ 



"TTWrZ^ 



TOTAL HOURS 



/x 



V 



«i 



T^ 



^ 



/z 



/ 






j!^ 






REPORT O. K. 



c==5^:7 



Fig. 76. — Daily time-sheets, by half-hours, for individual workers. 





Field Reno 


t. 








M = Men For We.l BoglDnlng 


iql Eodliii! 


191 1 


D.te 


Work 
Perroimud 


No 


Ciop 


Vo 


8.»- 


U.D 


T.. 


W,d 


T., 


Fi. 




To 


"' ) ■ 


Remarks 


rroii. 


H 


U 


H 


U 


u 


u 


H 


U 


U 


31 


U |U 


H 


11 


U 


U 


^ 




























































































































































































































































































LJ 




u 


1—1 


u 




U 


Li 








1— 


L J 




1— 


L 


L— 



















= 


= 


— 




— 


— 


— 




— 


— 






— 


— 1 






































































































TotBit 












































Nn tl.,. IT..H 




































rorcD.o 



Fig. 77. — Foreman's weekly report of work done. 



384 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Record of Materials TTsed Other than Feed (Do not inc 


ude cash 1 


purchases unless taken 
Month Of March ,,17 am^un^o"'"'""' 


Date 


Department 


Kind of Material 


Amount 


Value 


5 


Barley 


Seed 


100 sks 


$115 





25 


Potatoes 


', 


120 " 


no 


— 
















































' 



- 




































Totals 












Remarks 



Fig. 78. — Example of a materials record. 



Statement of Production 


Month of Sept iQ 77 






1 


Date 


Dept. Producing 


Kind of Product 


Amount 


Value 


31 


Dairy 


Cream 


300*bfat 


$90 


— 




• • 


Skim milk 


7000* 


u 


— 




,, 


3 Calves 


3 


18 


- 




Barley 


Pasture on stubble 


50 acres 


25 


- 




Swine 


Pork 


3600* @ «/ 


288 


— 




Potatoes 


Spuds 


1000 sks @'h 


loco 


- 
















































































Totals 








$n35 




Remarks 



Fig. 79. — Example of a production record. 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 



385 



Household Accounts are sometimes kept, to segregate items which 
properly belong to the care of the family. If the accounts have been 
completely kept, the household expenses are easily assembled from the 
cash record, inventory, and record of supplies used. These accounts 
often total to a considerable figure. 

An example of a household account is given in figures 81 and 82. 

Production per Animal. — Under miscellaneous records may be in- 
cluded the detailed stock-production records, as illustrated by daily 
production records per cow or trap nest records for fowls. 



1 


43 


1 


■: 


3 


4 




G 


" 


8 


'J 


1 1 1 1 


H In; li^i H N 'r-^ 


H 


ri 


31. Total 
]T.n>e 


Rale 
p.day 


AmoUDt 1 


K 




\1 


1-t 






lb 


1'^ 




■M 


-"- 




J4 




26 




is 




30 


8 


Ct3 


Occupation 
















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































44 


1 


". 


3 


4 


■■' 





' 


3 


'' 


lO 


11 


X, 


13 


14 




15 


'n 




y^ 


20 


21 


2L 


2. 


24 


25 




r 


;. 


29 




)1 


Tclil 
Time 


Hale 
pda; 


Amount 1 


lb 




11 


^"l 


S 


Cts 


OccUputiuD 












































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































45 


1 


2 


3 


\ 


5 





■ 


S 











IJ 


1^ 




1, ' M 


















T.til 
Time 


l:alc 
p.day 




Hi 


15 117 ,19| 21, 23 126: 27i 


2! ;i 


AmoUDt 1 


10 




li 




lb 




l; 




J( 




-'- 




-'4 

1 


26 

1 1 






30 




5 


CIS 


Occupatiuu 
























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































_ 










_ 






_ 


_ 


_^ 


_ 




_ 




_ 


_ 








^ 




_ 


_ 






_ 


_ 











Fig. 80. — Typical time-book page with spaces for three workers and some segregation 

of work done. 



Other Miscellaneous Records. — Other miscellaneous records occasion- 
ally found in farm offices are: breeding records, stock records, sales 
records, and accounts with others. Use of such records is determined 
by the needs of the individual business. (See Figs. 83 to 88.) 

Supplementary Notes. — There are many supplementary notes which 
it is desirable to keep in the same books with the accounts. Sometimes 
they are written on the page of the special account to which they belong ; 
at other times they are kept by themselves at the back of the book. 
Dates of "last killing frost in spring," "first killing frost in fall," "death 
of horse or cow, " and "height of hay in mow or silage in silo at this (given) 
date" may be cited as valuable information so recorded. 

25 



386 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



1 


i 
















_5| 






































?! 




« 


























\j 


k- 




























































«> 




^ 
























►?IV 






















































































^ 






























































<N 






















"^ 


























































































, 














































































































































































♦. 






















































































*^ 


fif 


















'^ 










^ 
























































i? 


, 




















































































•^ 


^■^ 
d 
















^ 




































































'^ 




















> 




































































N 
















^ 












1^ 


!^ 














>; 








■> 
















'^ 
















*^ 


^, 




















































































«> 


N 


\l 










































s 














^ 










<a 


















? 


t, 
































v^ 




















































s» 


N 


i 












^ 






























^ 
















^ 


























i2 














^ 






























'^ 
















V 


























- 




•1 
















































« 


















^ 


















X 












































































^ 










tj 


5 


\l 




















^ 


^ 
























^ 




^ 




































































^ 


~ 












t- 


s 








































\ 




































i; 








5 


















1^ 






















^ 








i^ 


^ 




























^» 


n 
























^ 






















"^ 


^ 


ii 


























'n 




















































^ 


"^ 




^ 
















































































s 






tj 


s 


5 
























'^ 


























^ 




















'^ 














£ 








































































5y 


- 












^ 


*" 


i 
















^ 










^ 


5 






^ 






















•^ 
















^ 




■i 








^ 

« 












N 










♦^ 




















































* 




^ 








■5 


** 


s 






"^ 


>5 


"^ 


"5 


^ 






"^ 


^ 


S 


^ 


o 


"^ 




"^ 


b 


?l 


Q 


^ 


^ 


"4 


'^ 


^ 


> 


-|^ 


[^ 


vS 




^ 


ii 


b 




"? 


s: 




,3 


>* 


'^ 




^1 






^H 


X 




^ 




■x 


t; 


* 




"^ 








w 




"^4 






■^ 


^ 














> 


VS 


!^ 


♦v 






^i 


,*■ 






■• 






^ 






































































































































































































































































1 


! 
































KS 






































? 


^ 


[^ 










"<» 




FARM COST ACCOUNTING 



387 



There are other records that may be kept if desired, such as herd 
records, maps of ditches, maps of the farm showing crops grown each year, 
and yearly crop records showing fertihzer or manure appHed and yields 
each year. These are not necessary to the success of the cost accounting 
but are useful at times and may be kept in the back of one of the books. 



RECEJPTS 



TraJe/y^e 



ft.-t^.^^^y 



2VJ^JC^ 



jt^<a,«x*c^^ 



JZL 



/9>>9 



4i_l3A'jL 



JJJ 



/oy 



■h 



zs- 



u^ 



// 



Jlic 



i^ 



i^a»^: 



21 



M 



J., 



/iSJL 



// 



Ac 



'J-Ji 



iS'Jl^ 



J. 



J.. 



.^^: 



j:£ 



Jti 



7^ 



zhi 



7^ 



H 



LL 



/e-hA//% UUz 



/2A^lil. 



/^Ji. 



75^ 



J2S 



/oS'4o 






ZA\A 



21. 



/£ 



y_iy_d.^ 



iSL^ 



l£i.'jot± 



jI: 



j:i 



iA^il 



i^ii. 



I'Zl'lo 



iLIi 



7^-L 



2/) 



2£lill 



/S 



6l^ 



m 



A', 



/I. 



A^(A. 



IC 



OS /O] 



& 



-^^ 



i:tizA/A 



/IJo 



eo_l 



M.'k 



^mI A tht ■ Sund »" • A "\\ cidtoli I" G lumiu n.y c wfi ^i 



^: 



j_'ro 



'k 



ih 



J. 



lA'JS-^ 



JiA. 



/Su 



1-k 



^36' 



U^ 



_2£ 



/oi ts /a.) 2[j 



/«i' 



Jl 



ZSe 



/fi£ 



Jo 



/I 



M 



< S u 



/r. 



^^ 



i^ 



/i'k 



ISo 



S±ei 



l^ 



U 



Al 



likM 



g-i 



/JjS /3 



/O^ 



i£ic 



lis 



'i^'^fiA. 



J'Sc 



/oSh 



¥c 



■^1 



J ao 



fys^ ify" 



/?/ / 



iJ'ea 



/J 00 



/OS JO 



J2>c 



I& 



U-A. 



^j 



M 



ii\ 






*<■ c 



Up 



Xo 



If^ 



i!^. 



loiJS 



^ 



S 



2L 



•k 



J.?£ 



4LL 



/lie 



SI Jiec 



J'e 



/O&jS 'io\io 



J\ 



l^Si 



LI 



ilP 



iti^ 



l ^Jo 



i'l 



li'^ 



liSo 



:ltfS 






I'A-k. 



lSL\ 






ij'io 



'f 



7p 



/ 2|f0 



iVUo 



SUMMARY OF HOUSEHOLD ACCOUNTS 
Fig. 82. 



Opening Cost Records at the Beginning of the Year.— The opening 
of the books is not difficult if the inventory is complete and properly 
prepared. First, an account is opened in the financial record with each 
class of property as shown by the inventory, such as "Real Estate," 
"Horses," "Cows," "Machinery," "Feed and Supplies" and other 
forms of property, and also with each individual or firm whose name 
appears in the lists of "Accounts Receivable" and "Accounts Payable." 



388 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



T+ 










; -II' 



Fig. 83. — ^Ledger accounts. A record of bills owing to or owed by the farm. 



FEED RECORD 
Kind of Stock -Dairy-Cows Week Ending _A/ay_S2 19 10 




















1 






B 





s 










































soo 


Kate 




"4 


64 




4 


63 




3H 


63 




4 


65 




4h 


C4 




3h 


62 




4 


64 


27H445\ 


975 


AuthU 




S 


SO 




8 


SO 




8 


SO 




8 


SO 




8 


7C 




y 


S2 




7 


SI 




56 ^55t 


ucd 


Degit 




6 


02 




6 


92 




6 


02 




6 


92 




6 


92 




c 


02 




6 


92 




42 644 


122C 


Lady 




S 


DO 




S 


90 




S 


90 




8 


00 




8 


90 




s 


90 




8 


90 




5G ^G3C 


sse 


Beauty 




4 


63 




4 


G3 




4 


63 




4 


63 




4 


63 




4 


63 




4 


6S 




28^47 C 


1440 


Glencoe 




7 


no 




6 


IOC 




7 


110 




7 


110 




6 


IOC 




6 


100 




7 


110 




4G 740 


950 


Pet 




7 


iO 




7 


SO 




7 


SO 




7 


S3 




7 


S3 




7 


S3 




7 


S3 




49 572 


1000 


Bess 




G 


SO 




6 


SG 




6 


SG 




6 


SG 




6 


86 




G 


SO 




G 


SO 




42 ^602 


127f 


Cynthia 




S 


100 




S 


100 




9 


100 




S 


100 




8 


100 




8 


100 




S 


100 




56 j700 


S50 


May 




5 


65 




5 


05 




5 


65 




6 


05 




4 


60 




■4 


60 




4 


60 




32 \440 


900 


Gertie 




6 


70 




6 


70 




6 


70 




G 


70 




G 


70 




C 


70 




G 


70 




42 


490 


127^ 


Alia 




8 


100 




S 


IOC 




8 


100 




S 


106 




8 


100 




S 


IOC 




8 


100 




56 


700 


W5C 


Rule 


24 


4ii 


42 


25 


4 


43 


23 


5 


45 


24 


4h 


44 


20 


4 


43 


25 


414 


45 


23 


5 


42 


169 


sm 


301 


130C 


Pauliue 


n 


a 


45 


27 


6 


45 


27 


6 


45 


27 


6 


45 


27 


G 


45 


27 


6 


45 


27 


G 


45 


hS9 


42 bl5 


lS5i 


Princess 


30 


7 


4S 


HO 


7 


IS 


30 


7 


4S 


30 


7 


4S 


30 


7 


4S 


30 


7 


4S 


30 


7 


4S 


no 


44 [336 












































































































X Pounds 




































































































_ 



H = Hay. 
G = Grain. 

S = Soiling. 



Fig. 84. — Example of a feed record in conjunction with a dairy. 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 



389 



When these accounts have been opened the inventory amounts under 
under each head are carried to their respective accounts. All "asset" 
items are entered on the left-hand page of the accounts under "Receipts," 
and the "Charges" on the right-hand page. When all the entries as 
shown by the inventory have been made, the books are said to have 



(Do not include cash purchases ' 
Record of Feed Used unjess unsesregated when boufiht; 

ilonth of January l<)17 


Date 


Department 


Kind of Feed 


Amouut 


Value 


20 


Dairy 


Alfalfa hey 


20 t- 


$160 


- 


22 


.. 


Barley 


2 t. 


52 


- 




Swine 


,> 


1 t 


22 


- 


29 


Dairy 


lasture 


lOAfor Swks 


20 


- 


















































^^" 4 , 




























Totals 








$251, 




Eemi 


rks 





Fig. 85. — A feed consumption record for all departments of a diversified farm business. 



















HORSE AND MULE 


PASTURE 

Month 


En 


din 


K 


















a 


AllaUa Pabtute 


Gia^s Pasture 


Stuliljla Piisluie 


Beet T„p Pasture | 


Ucit» 


Sl.I-a 


Coll. 


Tola 


Uoi-eP 


JHl^S 


CoUs 


roidi 


Lol'.eb 


>l^..a 


Uuti* 


fol. 


Ii0l~f>l 


Slo,oii 


Coll. 


r 


l,OI 


No 


I.01 


No 


l,Ol 


No 


l.o. 




I...1 


s-., 


I No 


I.oi 


No 


1.01 


No 


i,ol 


No 


I.H 


No 


L«i No 


I.OI 


No 




1 






























































































































































































































































































U 


Ui 


y 






ii. 




t^ 














iii 


^ 


— 


— 






^ 


t^:^ 


— 




— 






— 


^^ 




1^ 

ZT 


—\ 








= 






F=i 


F=q 


1=1 


n 


i=q 




rrr 


= 


pq 


F=-, 




F-^ 


n 




i=] 




P=] 






pq 


p=l 


























































2i 


























































2S 


























































,"!t 





















































































































































































Fig. 86. — Monthly pasture record. 

been "opened." Each year, after the books have been finally closed 
and the results drawn off, the foregoing process is repeated for the 
accounts of the new year. Other accounts are afterwards opened 
throughout the year as items occur to be charged or credited to them. 

Closing Cost Accounts at the End of the Year. — Although consider- 
able time may be required to close a set of accounts, it usually comes at 



390 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



















R 




h 


LIVE STOCK 
No 






Uontb 


EudiE 


R 












1 


1 


Addit'oDS 


KJuai.ma 


Ou 


E>il..ii 


V 


H& 


ll.,aeC(,'». 


Uul 


Jen 


MuVCoU- 


Tutil 


as 


Hi 
M 


n. ^cc»- 


M..I 


J.-. 


Uul,C.li> 


Toiil 




IV 


2U 


» e 


i\ 


2\h 


a K 


w 


•Il« 


^'k 


n 


2\i, 




pi.li'a 




































































































































































































- 






















































































































































L 




^^ 


^^ 




^^ 




L-J 


L-J 








L_ 




^ 


LaJ 




L_i 


1— J 




L_ 


LJ 




1 _ 








1 — ~f 1 


[ 1 


r — , J — 1 


r ■ 


-=^- 





— ^ 


■ [ 


^ — 1 




1 — — 


1 


^^ 


-— 


-^ 




" — ' 


' — 1 























































































































































































































































































































S & J = Stallions and jacks. 
H & M = Horses and mares. 
Sg = Suckling colts. 
lY = One year old colts. 
2Ys = Two year old colts. 
Mul = Mules. 
Jen = Jennies. 

Fig. 87. — Monthly record of livestock on hand. 



Memorandum of Capital Account 
















_I!8n 










h 


Statement of Capital at Eeginnin 
Opera'or'8 Investment 

( a) In ranch, and equipment 

( 1))-A8 cash- on band for running cxpeos 


% of CusinesB Year 


















? 


Be 


rrowed Investment ( Mortgage or Note ) 


/I \ Ao /.ooV> nr, l.o,.H f^,. 














s 






Grand TotaJ Invested in U-isincss , 

(Operator's and Borroned-Monev ) * 







Record of Muney Torrowed for lovesttrent 1 


Loan 
No. 


Borrowed 


Date of 
Loan 


Penod of 
L.an 


Hate of 
Interest 


When 
Due 


Au.oo 
Prin 


nt ofl 
jEaVI 


1 














n 
















3 














4 














Statement of Chans^es in Capital Dunne Dusiness ^ ear 
Becord of Borrowin-'S 




Loon Borrowed 
IS'u from 


Date of 
Loan 


Period of 
Loan 


Rale of 
Interest 


Wlien 
Due 


Auiotiit of 
Principal 


5 












6 












1 












8- 












Record of Payments | 


Date 


Repaid (o 


)n Ace 
Loan 
Ko. 


Total 
Payment 


Amount 

of 
Interest 


Amount 

of 
Principal 


Balance 1 

Remaining 1 

Unpaid 1 


























































































1 



Fig. 88. — Record of borrowings and repayments, with spaces for a statement of 

financial standing. 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 391 

a season when other work is not pressing and weather conditions are more 
favorable to working indoors than out. A definite order of procedure 
should be adhered to in closing the accounts. The following order has 
proved satisfactory.^^ 

1. Take a second inventory of the entire farm. 

2. Itemized statements should be requested from all dealers from whom goods 
are regularly bought on credit. These should all be inspected and any items thereon 
which have not yet been entered on the books should be entered at once. Memoranda 
should be made of amounts due the hired men or any other persons. All accrued 
income and expense of every nature, pertaining to the old year and not yet entered on 
the books, should be charged or credited in the proper columns. 

3. Accounts receivable should be inspected and handled in the same manner. 

4. The "Feed" records are next figured up to date and the corresponding entries 
made charging the animal accounts and crediting the crop accounts, or "'Feed and 
Supplies," as the case may be. 

5. The various live stock accounts should be credited with the value of any feed 
charged to them at harvest or time of purchase and not yet consumed. Such surplus 
feeds will be so valued also in the final inventory after the books are closed. The 
animal accounts for the new year should be charged in like amounts in opening the 
books, the values of these being thus deducted from the expenses of the year in which 
purchased and being charged against the year in which they were consumed. This is 
sound accounting practice, and is known as "reversing the entries." 

6. The value of pasture utilized by the animals during the year should be charged 
to their respective accounts and "Pasture" account credited in like amount. The 
rate charged for pasture should be as near as possible the price for which pasture 
rents in the region. Pasture accounts should, of course, be charged with all the 
expenses of pasture maintenance, as well as for the use of land in pasture as hereafter 
described. 

7. The value of farm produce used in the home, if not entered before, should be 
attended to next. Included in this would be estimates of the quantities of milk, 
butter, eggs, potatoes, apples, etc., used by the farmer and his household. Personal 
account should be charged with these values and the proper animal or crop accounts 
credited. 

8. The value of the board, produce, or other allowances, furnished the farm 
laborers should be estimated and the amount charged against "Labor" account, 
crediting "Personal" account with the value of the board and the crop or other 
accounts for the value of the produce or other allowances. 

9. The value of the unpaid farm labor done by the farmer and members of his 
family who are not being paid regular wages should next be estimated and entered. 
"Labor" account should be charged, and "Personal" account credited. 

. 10. The animals should be credited with the value of the manure produced by them 
during the year and the total value of manure charged against the " Manure " account. 
These data can be secured from the "Manure" account in the Work Record if the 
latter has been properly kept. 

IL Estimates of proper amounts for the use of the farm buildings for the year 
should be made. Each crop or class of animals, the "Personal" account, and the 
accounts with machinery and man labor should receive a charge proportionate to its 
use of the buildings and the total amount so charged should be credited to the "Real 
Estate " accounts. The use of other kinds of buildings is estimated, and when all have 
been so handled the total " use of buildings " cost is found and charged to each account. 
As a general rule it is safe to charge 8 to 10 per cent of the current value of ordinary 



392 FARM MANAGEMENT 

frame farm buildings as annual use cost or rent. Brick, stone, tile, and concrete 
buildings should take a somewhat lower rate. 

12. The Work Record should next be reviewed and the hours and minutes 
of man labor charged to each account should be added up. The various totals should 
then be added together and the total hours of man labor found for the year. 

13. The total net cost of the "Man Labor" account in the Financial record should 
then be found by subtracting from the total of the charges the total of any credits. 
This net cost should then be divided by the total hours of man labor for the year. 
This gives the man-hours rate. It should be worked out in terms of cents and mills 
per man-hour. 

14. The total hours of man labor, including chores, found against each account 
in the Work Record should be carried over to the charge page of the same accounts 
in the Financial Record. The hours should then be multiplied in each case bj' the man- 
hour rate and the cost in dollars and cents carried to the monej' columns, crediting 
" Man labor" account, item bj^ item, with the same. When this has been completed, 
the "Man labor" account will balance within a small amount. 

15. The to'al hours and minutes of horse labor are next found in exactly the 
same manner as the man labor. Before the net cost of horse labor can be found, 
interest (at current rates for secured loans) must be charged and the final inventory 
value of the horses must be credited to their account. After this has been done the net 
cost of horse labor and the horse-hour rate are determined exactly as for man labor. 

16. The total hours of horse labor against each account in the Work Record are 
next charged against the same accounts in the Financial Record, the values found 
by multiph'ing by the horse-hour rate and extended to the money columns of the 
various accounts, and the sum total credited to the "Horse Labor" account exactly 
similarly to the method of handUng the man labor. 

17. The distribution of the annual cost of using machinery is the next step, and 
it is handled just as were the man and horse labor cost, with a few important excep- 
tions. The inventory value of machinery' and any machinery parts on hand at the 
end of the year are first credited to the "Machinery" account in the Financial Record, 
interest charged, and the net cost for the j^ear ascertained. To distribute this cost 
is now the problem. There is no record of machinery hours, but such a record can 
be dug out of the various accounts in the Work Record if desired, and an hour rate 
worked out for each important machine and group of minor tools. This is the most 
accurate manner in which this cost can be distributed, but while valuable results to 
the student and investigator would be obtained, it is doubtful whether the practical 
farmer would find them useful enough to pay for the long process of figuring involved. 
A shorter method is available," if it be assumed that for everj^ hour a horse is worked 
machinery is also used, and therefore each account should have charged against it 
the same number of machinery hours as horse-hours. Machinery cost may then be 
distributed on the basis of horse-hours. There is only one hitch here. Horse-hours 
have been charged to "Machinery" account, and therefore if this basis is used ma- 
chinery wall have recharged against it a certain proportion of its own cost. This can 
be obviated by first deducting from the total horse-hours the number of horse-hours 
charged to " Machinery" account and using the remainder as the basis for distributing 
the entire machinery cost. This .should now be done, proceeding with the distribution 
exactly as explained for the man-labor cost. 

Assembling and Distributing Machine Cost and Overhead Cost. — The Office of 
Farm Management of the United States Department of Agriculture, in its cost 
accounting work, assembles and distributes machine cost and overhead according to 
the following memorandum prepared by Mr. J. S. Ball. * 

*Especially prepared Jan. 29, 1919, for the author, when acting chief of the U. S. 
Department of Agriculture Office of Farm Management. 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 



393 



Table 149 illustrates the methods of assembling the annual costs of farm implements 
as made up of their depreciation, repairs and upkeep (both labor and cash), building 
charges, taxes, and insurance. Each implement used for a definite purpose is con- 
sidered a unit in assembling the costs. If there are more than one of identically 
similar implements the two are combined as one unit. After a table is completed 
showing the costs for the year of each separate implement unit, the cost for minor 
tools is added thereto to get the grand total of implement costs for the year. Table 
150 illustrates how the annual charges when determined are distributed to the cost 
accounts of the various farm enterprises. 

Each implement is distributed on the acreage basis. Implements which may 
cover the ground a number of times, depending upon conditions and time hmits, 
are thought to have their cost distributed pro rata on the basis of the total hours to 
each enterprise for use of the majority of implements. 

The tables presented have been somewhat abridged, as the actual list of all tools 
and implements on even a small farm and the actual distribution of the cost of all the 
farm enterprises would make unwieldy tables. 

The value of this method is two fold : not onh' is the machinerj' charge distributed 
on an accurate basis, but data are provided which enable studies to be made of the 
costs of individual implements and classes of implements. 



T.\BLE 149. — Illustrating a Method of Assembling Annual Costs of Farm 

Implements 



Name of implement 



Num- 
ber 



farm 



Initial 



ventory 
value 



Annual costs 



Depre- 
ciation 



Inter- 
est 



Repairs and upkeep 



Labor Cash 



Total 



Build- 
ing 
charge 



Taxes 
and 

insur- 
ance 



Total 



Walking plows. . 
Disk harrow. . . . 
Spike harrow. . . . 

Land roller 

Cultivators 

Corn planter. . . . 

Corn binder 

Mower 

Hay rake 

Totals 

Minor crop tools 

Grand totals. . 



30.00 
18.00 
12.00 
5.00 
20.00 
15.00 
60.00 
20.00 
10.00 



5.00 
3.00 
2.00 



.00 



190.00 
22.27 



$202 . 27 



15.00 
2.72 



$17.72 



S 1.37 
0.82 
0.55 
0.25 
0.88 
0.75 
3.00 
1.00 
0.50 



51.04 
0.3S 

0.21 
1.25 
1.10 
0.70 
0.38 
0.82 



9.12 
1.05 



5.88 
0.77 



$10.17 S6.65 



50.50 



0.65 
0.40 



$1.54 
0.38 

0.21 
1.25 
1.10 
1.35 
0.78 
0.82 



1.55 
1.05 



7.43 
1.82 



>2.60 $9.25 



$0.21 
0.14 
0.09 
0.04 
0.15 
0.13 
0.50 
0.17 
0.08 



SO. 15 
0.09 
0.06 
0.02 
0.10 
0.07 
0.30 
0.10 
0.05 



1.51 



SI. 51 



0.94 
0.11 



$1.05 



$ 8.27 
4.43 
2.70 
0.52 
7.38 
2.05 
5.15 
2.05 
1.45 



34.00 
5.70 



$39.70 



Annual charge for minor tools is 16.75 per cent of that for major implements. 



394 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



o 
O 

< 

z 

< 

a 

K 
Eh 

O 
Z 

P 

a 

B5 

































00 


1 






m 


o ■* 


■* OS 


CO 











O 


QO ^ 


a -^ 


•* 


w 






r-^ «' 


IM O 


CO 







>> 

03 
























w 


02 


O O 












.^ 


lO »o 
















a 


















tJ 


o o 
















^ 


<N CO ro lO ^ 


^ CO 


t» 


0; 






o 


lO to N IN m 


o; CO 


IM 


ro 




_^ 


O 


o o o o o 


■H O 


(N 


d 




c 




^ 






































§ 


-2 


tN lO O MO 








a 




*H 


CO M o ro lo 








.2 




P 


<N ■>^' CD C^ "-1 
















































'iH 




*^ 


CO N t^ ^ J2 




00 -^ 


05 


■<j< 



CQ 




o 


CO Tji -^ o CO 




rj C^) 


Tt< 


01 


Q 


o 


O 


o d d o o 




rt o 


T-H 


d 






«» 










o3 
























o 


X 


o o o o O 










Ph 


"S 


IC o "^ O lO 

i-H CO Ttl i-H O 


















IN 00 O O u^ *0 lO 


•* h- 


»-( 


10 






,d 


■* CO CO ■* o o « 




00 CO 


•o 


i> 














02 






t^ CO (N O t^ IN "5 




t^ T* 


n' 








Cj 






CM 


CO 


d 




s 




e« 










o 
























O 




'-0 lO O O O O CO ■ 












-2 


CO (N >o O O CO CO 


















'3 


CO Tf 05 ■^ •* CO CO 


















D 


CO (N IC rH N CO CO 




















N 














INo2C:>OCqr-|.fli05t-. 


C 












C^COCOCOCOCD>OOC 


£ 












MrtOOOO'-''^CS 








o a 












■J «■ 


3 


ddddoddoc 














^ 


_ 


"c 












OOioOOOcOCOINC 






"^ -2 




— it^OOiOCOCOOOC 


c 
c. 








o C 




l^rtOOrJicoCOOOt^ 










H 3 




coco^^— 'cococor-i 


c 








s 
o 




cres plowed 
ours used 
ours used 
ours used 
ours used 
ores covered 
cres covered 
ores covered 


a 
ir 

C£ 


a 

0) 

- E 

o 

_E 








0S-C-Cj:X c3 03 o3J: 


^ 








_ 




t^coOC^aoutiiOioir 


o c 


o 






5 3 " 


^ 


(N-ft^'OCOO'HOTt 


o t- 


t^ 








O fi 


D 


00-1<MOr^iN'O(M.- 


-tH IT 


05 








H ^ 


J 




CO 


CO 








•^ 03 




«# 






1 






































e 


































o 


























a> 








E 


























bD 








Ji 


























C« 








"E 


































s 


































•-^ 


























c 


(U 






























C) 






o 




oi 


















~ 


3 £ 


ci 




s 




;ing plow 
Harrow. 

! harrow 
roller 


z 

c 

> 


It 

03 C 

ax 


a 






< 


5 _0 

3' £ 

i "3 


0, 

a 














> li 











& 


c 




1, n 


c 




1^ 


% 


H 




^ 









FARM COST ACCOUNTING 



395 



Amou7it of Annual Equipment Costs. — The make-up of annual charge for the use 
of mechanical equipment (machinery, tools, implements, wagons, etc.), expressed in 
terms of percentages of initial annual inventory plus the cost of n^w equipment pur- 
chased, was found by Ball* to be for certain farms as follows: 

Table 151. — Amount of Annual Equipment Costs 



State 



Number 
years, 
records 



Depre- 
ciation, 
per cent 



Rate of 
interest 

on aver- 
age in- 
ventory 
value, 

per cent 



Repairs 

and 
upkeep, 
per cent 



Build- 
ing 
charge, 
per cent 



Taxes and 

insurance, 

per cent 



Total 
annual 
charges, 
per cent 



New York 

New York 

New York 

New York 

Illinois (5 farms) 

Iowa 

Pennsylvania. . . 
North Carolina. . 
Wisconsin 



6(1910-15) 


10.2 


4.2 


4.9 


3.9 


4(1911-14) 


14.2 


4.5 


6.6 


5.4 


3(1911-13) 


9.5 


4.3 


4.4 


0.9 


3(1912-14) 


11.2 


4.4 


3.5 


1.8 


1(1912) 


11.0 


4.3 


6.0 


0.2 


2(1911-12) 


10.8 


4.4 


4.5 


0.3 


1(1911) 


7.8 


4.5 


6.4 


• 


1(1911) 


10.3 


4.8 


3.0 


« 


1(1910) 


7.8 


4.5 


14.3 


* 




10.3 


4,4 


6.0 


2.1 



0.6 
0.5 
0.6 

0.8 



24.1 
31.2 
19.7 
21.7 
21.5 
20.0 
18.7 
18.1 
26.6 



23.4 



"Not apportioned to equipment costs. 



18. Any other accounts of convenience, like "Manure," "Feed and Supplies," 
"General Expense," etc., should now be distributed and these accounts closed. 

19. All other values in the final inventory, not already credited, should be carried 
to their respective accounts and credited on the right-hand pages thereof. 

20. Interest, based on the average inventories of each account (except "Horses," 
and "Machinery," which have already been charged), should be charged thereto 
and "Interest" account credited with the total. The rate should be the same as that 
already used in the two accounts specified. 

21. A proper charge to crops and pasture should now be made for the use of the 
land, the total credited to "Real Estate" account. The rate per acre should be high 
enough to cover interest and taxes but not so high as to make "Real Estate" account 
show any great .profit. In fact the "Real Estate" account should be, if possible, 
made to balance, by the credit for use of land. This can be done by finding the net 
balance of the "Real Estate" account and dividing by the number of acres to be 
charged with rent. This will give a rate per acre which can then be 
handled exactly like that of "Man labor," "Horse," and "Machinery" accounts, 
and any small balance remaining can be handled in the same way. A point to 
remember is that if the final inventory value of the real estate has been increased 
over that at the beginning of the year to keep pace with actual advances in real 
estate values in the locality, such advanced values should not be used in making the 
above distribution, but the amount of such advance should be first taken out of the 
account and carried to "Loss and Gain" account as a separate, distinct gain. 

22. Both sides of the crop, live stock pasture, and any other enterprise accounts 
should now be footed up and the lesser total subtracted from the greater to obtain the 
balance as shown by each account. These balances are now to be closed to "Loss 

*J. S. Ball in memorandum to the author, date Feb. 4, 1919. 



396 FARM MANAGEMENT 

and Gain" account. If the charge side is greater in an account, the excess represents 
a loss and should be carried accordingly to the credit side of the "Loss and Gain" 
account. 

23. Both sides of the "Loss and Gain " account should now be footed up, the lesser 
subtracted from the greater, and thus the net gain or loss for the year determined. 

Increased Land Values. — In making up a statement of farm profits 
and losses, increase in land values should be shown as a separate item 
outside of inventory values. It may be included under some such 
heading as "Increase in the value of investment due to increase in land 
value." The reason for not including the item is based on the belief 
that it is a profit due to influences outside the scope of the operator, and 
is not a direct farm profit traceable to the business. Usually it is a fluctua- 
tion in security values traceable to a rising and falling stock market, and, 
with only limited exception, not traceable to any single individual's 
managing influence. 

Determining Overhead. — The use of a catch-all or general account is 
not acceptable in best cost accounting work, and where it can be avoided 
the desired results will be easier of attainment. In certain instances, 
however, a general account is provided to contain such things as taxes, 
work on roads, cleaning ditches, repairing buildings, constructing fences, 
office supplies, insurance, and upkeep and depreciation of horses, imple- 
ments, and equipment kept for general use. When such an account is 
maintained, it becomes necessary at the end of the year to determine the 
overhead charges which the business must meet and to prorate a share 
to each of the departments constituting the earning plant. 

The overhead is determined by making up from the inventory those 
things not taken care of by the separate departments at both the begin- 
ning and ending of the year, and charging interest at 6 per cent. 

Illustrating Method of Determining Overhead. — Table 152 illustrates 
the method of assembling overhead expense items to make the total for 
the year, and indicates the class of items that compose such a charge. 
When the total overhead expense of a farm for a given year is determined, 
the question arises how shall it be distributed. The method adopted 
here is similar to that used in factory accounting. It is to distribute 
overhead expense on the basis of the costs for direct labor and direct 
cash and materials charged to the farm enterprises. In Table 152 the 
total amount of charges on which overhead distribution is based is given 
for each of the two farms illustrated, and the rate of overhead charge 
follows in each case. 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 



397 



Table 152. — Illustration of Determining and Prorating the Class of Items 
Entering into Overhead Expense 
(From the Summarized Records of Three lUinois Farms) 



Items 



Beekman 
1912 



Man- 
chester 
1912 



Miles 
1912 



Cash items: 

Telephone rental 

Stationery and postage 

Farm papers 

Interest paid on borrowed money. 

No-hunting notices 

Undistributable taxes 



Total cash items 

Labor items : 

Maintenance of fences 

Maintenance of hedges 

Maintenance of farm roads. . 
Maintenance of farm ditches. 

Cutting weeds. 

Undistributable labor 



Total labor items. 



Total overhead expense 

Total basis of distribution 

(Sum of direct labor cost and direct cash and 

materials costs charged to farm enterprises) . . . 
Rate of overhead charge, per cent 



$ 7.25 
1.15 



61.98 
1.00 
3.31 

$64.69 

$17.02 

4.26 

2.20 

6.72 

49.00 

17.78 

$96 . 98 



$161.67 
5,240.45 



5.0 



$ 0.10 

6.90 

5.68 

32.00 

3.49 

$48.17 
$22.50 



6.52 

8.50 

27.56 

12.93 



$78.01 



$126.18 
1,496.17 



8.4 



$15.30 



8.05 



$23 . 35 



56 
40 

85 



0.86 

25.44 

6.55 



$46 . 66 



$70.01 
$642 . 12 



10.9 



Final Test of Value of Cost Accounts. — The test of the value of 
accounts comes when the final summary is made. But there are certain 
little items that perplex. It is a simple matter to charge the cost of 
seed, fertilizer, and hours of labor to a crop, and credit it with the amount 
of the yield. It doesn't take long to sum up the amount paid for a bunch 
of steers, charge them with the feed eaten in the feed lot, and credit them 
with the total price which they brought in the market; but such totals 
do not make for accuracy. 

The troublesome items to handle are the charges for shelter, rent of 
land, cost of pasture, value of manure produced, and their share in over- 
head cost. The only way to get these charges distributed properly is to 
proceed in a certain orderly way to close the books. 

Example of Annual Statement Compiled from Costs Records. — Where 
cost records have been properly carried throughout the year, all costs 
distributed, and the summarizing done, the final statement will show the 



398 



FARM MANAGEMENT 




Fig. 89. 




Fig. 90. 
Examples of department cost accounting. On trial balance ruling paper. 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 



399 



costs involved in each crop and stock product, the total income obtained, 
and the resulting profit or loss. 

The figures show the approximate price which must be realized on 
each commodity in order to avoid a loss. Such figures for a series of 
years will be increasingly valuable. 

The following table shows how cost accounts on an eastern North 
Carolina farm were utilized to show whether each farm department made 
a profit or a loss and how much.^" 

Table 153. — Example of Annual Statement Compiled from Costs Records 



Farm enterprise 



Income 



Cost 



Profit 



Loss 



Tobacco 

Corn for grain . 
Corn silage. . . . 

Oats 

Hay: 

Clover. . . . 

Cowpea. . . 

Rye 

Truck crops. . . . 
Dairy herd. . . . 

Hogs 

Poultry 

Sand pit 

Wood lot 

Outside labor. . 



SI, 039. 25 

145 . 25 

337.50 

65.00 

90.00 
120.00 

30.00 

170.02 

2,185.24 

227.50 

193.05 

74.50 
358.00 

68.74 



Total !$5, 104.05 

Deducting loss 



Net farm profit . 



5 388.83 

355.01 

362.44 

90.54 

43.03 

88.33 
47.40 

122.12 
2,604.17 

145.30 
76.54 
33.26 

265 . 82 
65.38 



$4,688.17 



$ 650.42 



46.97 
31.67 



47.90 



82.20 

116.51 

41.24 

92.18 

3.36 



$1,112.45 
696.57 

$ 415.88 



$209.76 
24.94 
25.54 



17.40 
418.93 



$696.57 



Where losses are sustained, the study of the facts for past years 
when profits were made may show why the losses occur, and encourage the 
farmer to strive to overcome, in the future, the conditions that caused 
them. 



400 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Example of a Crop Enterprise Costs Record. — An example showing 
the details of 5 years cost data covering the growing of potatoes on a 
western New York farm is presented below :^^^ 



Table 154. — Cost Record Covering 5 Years of 


Potatoes on a 


New York Farm 




1910 


1911 


1912 


1913 


1914 


Five-year 
average 


Acres grown 


20.5 


17.2 


20.7 


19.3 


16.7 


18.88 



Per acre costs: 
Labor in growing: 

Man 

Horse 

Labor in harvesting: 

Man 

Horse 

Total labor cost:. 

In growing 

In harvesting 

Materials used: 

Manure 

Seed 

Fertilizer 

Lime for spraying 

Arsenate of lead 

Sulphate of copper 

Total cost of materials 

Indirect costs: 

Implement cost 

Interest and taxes 

Overhead expense 

Total indirect cost 

Total, all costs 

Per bushel costs: 

Labor to grow 

Labor to harvest 

Total labor cost 

Materials 

Indirect cost 

Total costper bushel 

Yield per acre bushels 

Selling price per bushel 

Seed per acre bushels 

Seed cost per bushel, dollars 
Fertilizer per acre, pounds. . 
Cost per ton, dollars 



$ 7.61 
10.67 



5.46 
4.65 



18.28 
10.11 



2.76 
3.20 
8.13 
0.48 
1.70 
1.48 



17.75 



4.39 
2.96 
3.30 



10.65 



0.09 

0.05 

0.14 

0.09 

0.05 

0.28 

201.00 

0.40 

12.8 

0.25 

643.0 

25.32 



7.36 
8.50 



5.29 
4.92 



15.86 
10.21 



9.13 
7.18 
13.10 
0.41 
1.40 
2.97 



34.19 



7.10 
3.75 
5.23 



16.08 



76.34 



0.08 

0.05 

0.13 

0.16 

0.08 

0.37 

208. 

0.55 

14.5 

0.49 

872.0 

30.02 



7.82 
9.65 



4.36 
3.74 



17.47 
8.10 



9.00 
17.78 
9.14 
0.44 
1.17 
2.53 



40,06 



8.37 
3.57 
6.59 



18.53 



0.08 

0.04 

0.12 

0.19 

0.09 

0.40 

208.0 

0.49 

15.5 

1.15 

700.0 

26.18 



8.10 
8.41 



4.22 
3.20 



16.51 
7.42 



1.23 

8.18 
10.32 
0.54 
1.34 
3.45 



25.06 



6.50 
5.43 

4.87 



16.80 



65.79 



0.10 

0.04 

0.14 

0.15 

0.10 

0.39 

168.0 

0.60 

16.1 

0.51 

767.0 

26.93 



5.78 
6.76 



4.93 
3.17 



12.54 
8.10 



8.59 
10.57 
10.04 
0.15 
1.26 
2.43 



33.04 



8.13 
5.40 
5.70 



19.23 



0.06 

0.04 

0.10 

0.15 

0.09 

0.34 

217.00 

0.28 

14.1 

• 0.75 

713.0 

28.20 



7.33 
8.80 



4.85 
3.94 



16.13 
8.79 



6.14 
9.38 
10.15 
0.40 
1.38 
2.57 



30.02 



6.90 
4.22 
5.14 



16.26 



0.08 

0.04 

0.12 

0.15 

0.08 

$0.35 

200.6 

0.464 

14.6 

0.63 

739.0 

$27.31 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 



401 





1910 


1911 


1912 


1913 


1914 


Five-year 
average 


Acres grown 


20.5 


17.2 


20.7 


19.3 


16.7 


18.88 


Rates per hour: 


Per 

acre 

S 0.153 
0.177 


Per 
acre 

$ 0.141 
0.143 


Per 
acre 

$ 0.156 
0.148 


Per 
acre 

» 0.171 
0.120 


Per 
acre 

$ 0.169 
0.130 


Per 

acre 

$ 0.158 


Horse labor 


0.144 


Man-hours per acre: 

To grow 


49.74 
35.68 


52.22 
37.55 


50.08 
27.95 


47.37 
24.72 


34.22 
29.16 


46.73 
31 01 






Total 


85.42 


89.77 


78.03 


72.09 


63.38 


77.74 


Horse-hours per acre: 


60.28 
26.29 


59.46 
34.40 


65.15 
25.27 


70.08 
26.63 


52.02 
24.37 


61.40 




27.39 






Total 


86.57 


93.86 


90.42 


96.71 


76.39 


88.76 



Example of a Live Stock Enterprise Costs Record. — Records for a 
dairy herd are illustrated in the next example. The data as given 
in the table are an approximate yearly record on a Wisconsin dairy farm.^* 

Table 155. — Cost Records of a Dairy Herd 

Data Item Subtotal Total 

Inventory 
Jan. 1, 1910 

Live stock— 47 cows, 3 bulls $2,725.00 

Equipment 409 . 30 

Total $3,134.30 

Jan. 1, 1911 

Live stock— 38 cows, 2 bulls 2 , 395 . 00 

Equipment 373 . 60 

Total 2 , 768 . 60 

Difference (decrjease) $ 365 . 70 

Receipts: 

Milk and cream (225,689.3 lb.) $3,630.29 

Cows sold 1,521.60 

Bulls sold 117.60 

Calves sold (34) 227 . 60 

Total receipts $5 ,497 . 09 



26 



402 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Expenses : 

Mixed hay, 26.5 tons 212 . 00 

Alfalfa hay, 10.71 tons 128 . 57 

Silage, 168.28 tons 673 . 14 

Grain, 34.38 tons 835 . 12 

Pasture, 7 months 275 . 86 

Total feed cost 2 , 124 . 70 

Man labor, 8,8191^ hr., at 12^ 1,058.34 

Horse labor, 1,443 1^ hr., at 10?' 155.35 

Total labor cost 1 ,202. 69 

Feed for bulls 80. 33 

New equipment 5 . 23 

Repairs on equipment 1.31 

Salt 13.70 

Advertisements 22 . 50 

Miscellaneous (general expense, etc.) 49.05 

Decrease in inventory 365 . 70 

Total miscellaneous expenses 537 . 82 



Total expenses 3,865.21 

Difference between receipts and expenses.. . 1 ,631 . 88 

Interest at 5 per cent on average investment in 

cattle and equipment 147 . 56 

Building charge, $6 per cow per year 255 . 00 402 . 56 



Balance 1,229.32 

Add estimated value of manure 641 . 05 



Profit $1,870.37 

Study and Interpretation of Results. — Unless studied, farm accounts 
are of little use to help make business more profitable in the future. It 
is just as important to study the different items of cost and returns in an 
account as to know whether or not it pays. Weather conditions, 
crop conditions, and market conditions for the year, as compared with 
an average year, must be considered. For instance potatoes in a given 
year may show heavy losses on many farms because of low prices or 
losses by rot. By studying the potato account to find the factors of 
production, and by considering normal yield and price for the locality, 
conclusions could be reached as to whether ordinarily it would or would 
not be profitable to raise potatoes again. 



FARM COST ACCOUNTING 403 

The potato account in Table 154 when studied, yields the following 

figures : 

Total acreage 14 . 88 

Total yield (bushels) 3 ,775 

Total cost $1,344.26 

Total value $1 ,751 . 60 

Total profit $ 407 . 34 

Yield per acre (bushels) 200 . 6 

Cost per acre $ 71 . 20 

Value per acre $ 93 . 08 

Profit per acre $ 21 . 88 

Man-hours per acre 77 . 74 

Horse-hours per acre 88 . 76 

Labor cost per acre $ 24 . 07 

Cost per bushel $ 0.35 

Value per bushel $ . 464 

Profit per bushel $ . 114 

Net return per hour of man labor $ 0. 438 

Besides the satisfaction of knowing which crops or enterprises have 
paid and how much, there are many other ways in which the accounts may 
be useful. They may be used to study the seasonal distribution of the 
labor on the farm as a whole and on certain enterprises, disclosing just 
where the rush seasons occur and what causes them. They may be used 
to compare results with neighbors, or with published cost records in 
newspapers and bulletins. The results of such comparisons should be to 
learn methods by which labor can be saved, thus cheapening production 
and correspondingly increasing the chances of a good profit. 

From keeping cost accounts an idea of the value of labor will be 
gained, it is soon discovered that time represents money, and that it is 
as important to save one as the other. The results set forth by the 
accounts wiP give a farmer many surprises. Sometimes it is found that 
the enterprises which he thinks are the best and to which he devotes 
most of his time do not show up so well financially as the enterprises 
that get little attention. 

Cost accounts, carefully and consistently kept, year after year, 
are certain to develop both the business of farming and the farmer's 
power of analyzing the causes and effects involved in his operations. 



CHAPTER XVIII 
COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 

A prime essential for a good farm manager is a knowledge of "What 
it costs. " 

A producer can not place a reasonable price on his goods, or from 
the prevailing market determine his possible profit upon production, 
unless he knows the various items of cost entering into the article. 

Knowledge of costs means fewer mistakes in judgment and better 
earning ability. 

Value of Costs of Production Data. — Collection and utilization of 
cost data show the relative costs of maintaining different industries, as 
well as the different departments of the same industry. It shows whether 
or not certain operations are being run at too great expense in comparison 
with the usual cost of such work. Accurate cost data are an invaluable 
help in analyzing Farm Accounts (with which they are closely associated) 
to show not only where leaks have reduced profit, but to indicate the 
paying branches of the industry, thus giving a general guide for planning 
future development. 

Cost data will also establish a standard rate for farm operations, by 
indicating what, in general practice, constitutes a normal output per man, 
per implement, and per horse. 

Studying Costs of Production. — Given the items of what constitutes 
cost as outlined above, together with a list of seed, feed, fertilizer, sacks, 
boxes, taxes, and the items in the following tables showing what in general 
are the labor requirements, the task of determining cost of production is 
well under way. 

From the farm manager's viewpoint, the cost of producing crops, 
animals, or crop or animal products can best be studied by working out 
details for the individual problem, rather than by accepting averages 
unless it is clearly proven that the average applies to the particular case. 
Under a knowledge of the methods in use, the amount of work accom- 
plished, at the cost of materials used, and under a realization of all the 
the items which should be taken into account, the calculations do not 
present any insurmountable difficulties. 

Items Entering Into Cost of Production. — In relation to costs of 
producing farm crops and animal products, difference of opinion prevails 
as to just what items enter into cost determinations and as to what 
method shall be used in gathering the basic data, 

404 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 405 

One view considers that acceptable cost data are obtainable from 
calculations covering the cost of man and horse labor, seed, expenditures 
for materials, taxes, insurance, interest on the investment, a sum for 
management, proration of depreciation and overhead charges, taking 
each item by itself and in the computations using the going rates. 
Another view insists that the total expense of running the entire project 
must be carefully determined and then prorated over each individual 
enterprise. 

For instance, a man farming 160 acres of wheat would, in the first case, charge each 
acre the going rate for man and horse (or tractor) labor, charge use of implement for 
each farm operation, and add cost of seed, taxes, and insurance," cost of harvest, sacks 
(if used), hauling, warehousing, and selling. The cost per bushel or per sack would 
thus be based on an estimate per acre for all items. In the second case, the total feed 
bills, man labor, and depreciation of equipment would be computed for a year's time 
and the rate per bushel or sack would be deduced from the total yield and total 
expense. 

As to ways of collecting average cost data for groups of farms, views 
on acceptable methods range through the collecting of data by means 
of carefully prepared questionnaires, by monthly visits and estimates of 
costs, b}^ continuous cost accounting records, by tabulating farmer's 
estimates, and by basing findings on personal impressions following 
visits to a reasonable number of individual enterprises. 

The object sought will largely determine the items to be included and 
the method of collection. Lack of time or lack of funds may make the 
questionnaire or the farmer's estimate method the only feasible one. Need 
for very careful data may necessitate careful farm to farm cost accounting 
methods and several years' lapse prior to the drawing of final conclusions. 

Objects Sought in Cost of Production Studies. — Cost of production 
studies are conducted from one or more of four points of view. The 
items that enter, their manner of collection, and the method of analysis, 
will depend on the object sought, the money available for the work, and 
the time available. Briefly, the four objects are: 

1. To determine the profitableness of different methods or different 
enterprises of a given farm business. 

2. To determine the profitableness of different farm businesses com- 
pared as wholes. 

3. The actual cost of production. 

4. The collection of data to serve as a basis for price fixing. 

The Farm Manager's Interest. — The farm manager is primarily 
interested in item (1). He is directly interested in the results of item (2) 
in so far as the findings will serve to influence his present methods of 
procedure. Item (3) from either the farm manager's or the broader farm 
economics standpoint, is of only very limited application ; for general pur- 
poses it may be ignored. There are special cases, however, when actual 



406 FARM MANAGEMENT 

costs are desired. A beet sugar company, for instance, will obtain actual 
costs of production in comparing the results from different holdings, and 
in determining whether beets shall be raised by the company on new 
lands at perhaps a higher cost than ordinary, or the difference be paid 
farmers to stimulate increase of production. Item (4) is of greatest 
interest to price fixing commissions and to students of State and national 
welfare. In so far as the reaction of price fixing affects the farm man- 
ager, he is interested in the collection of data and its proper interpreta- 
tion. It is, however, only an indirect interest. The items that together 
constitute the costs of production are generally agreed upon by farm man- 
agers and agricultural economists ; methods of collecting data while not con- 
curred in so universally, offer no very difficult obstacles; but methods of 
calculating the various data are not so easy of determination. 

Cost of Production Studies Should Start on Single Industry Farm. — 
In introducing cost of production studies, first attempts are best made on 
single industry farms. Here can be most easily obtained the basic 
determinations of charges for labor, machinery, supervision, overhead, 
depreciation, and the other items entering into cost of production. 
From the simpler story of collecting and computing data is furnished by 
single industry farms, the studies may then go forward into the complex, 
more difficult, diversified farm types. 

A further advantage of first studying the specialized or single enter- 
prise farm lies in the fact that in utilizing farm-kept books the data of 
the simpler farm businesses are more generally in usable shape. 

Average Cost Data Are an Unsafe Guide for Alt Conditions. — A 
little thought will indicate the danger of using average figures as a basis 
for figuring costs of operation for a specific farm. 

In irrigation, for instance, the cost depends upon such factors as — 
whether water is delivered by gravity or pumped; size of pumping 
equipment; if pumped, total lift, kind of motive power used, and length 
of continuous run, character of ditches, quantity of water used, number 
of irrigations given, method of applying, i.e., furrows or flooding, etc.; 
character of soil in field, whether sandy, clayey, hardpan, or quicksand 
subsoil. 

Even in preparing the soil, cost differences will arise — according to 
motive power used, whether steam, gasoline, or stock; number of men 
required; condition of the soil, i.e., sod, fallow, or virgin; kind of soil, 
i.e., sandy, gravelly, loamy, clay, or adobe; amount of growth present; 
amount of moisture ; topography and character, whether hilly, level, rolling, 
rocky, or swampy. 

Harvest costs vary, particularly with the size of the crop, larger crops 
costing more per acre to handle than small crops, even though the unit 
cost of production {i.e., per bushel, per ton, per hundredweight, etc.) is 
less for large than for small crops. With grain there are more sacks and 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 



407 



twine to be purchased and more hauling to be done. With fruit, addi- 
tional trays, lug boxes, dipping vats, etc, must be provided. In the 
case of sugar beets, potatoes, beans, and other field crops, there is increased 
expense in plowing out or cutting off, collecting, sorting, and hauling. 

Hauling, too, varies with the distance to the point of delivery and with 
the kinds of road to be traversed. The expense may vary according 
to whether trucks are used, or horses. Then, if the railroad is concerned 
in the delivery, the item of freight is a very variable one since schedules 
are based not only upon the distance traversed, but also upon the char- 
acter and quantity of the goods. 

Range of Costs Illustrated. — Costs of production vary within wide 
extremes. A corporation farming 20,000 acres in one of the western 
states* has practiced very careful farm cost accounting. For a single 
given year their books show a striking range in yields and costs: 



Table 156. — Showing Range in Acre Costs of Producing Barley 



Acreage 


Yield 


Cost of production 


Cost per hundred- 


hundredweight 


per acre 


weight 


761 


9.83 


$ 4.41 


$0.45 


40 


51.81 


15.95 


0.31 


1,600 


17.00 


6.83 


0.40 


64 


30.47 


12.55 


0.41 


273 


10.96 


5.34 


0.49 


1 , 150 


10.43 


4.21 


0.40 


3,888 


21.77" 


$ 8.21 


$0.39 totals 
and averages 



For six grain fields, totaling 3,888 acres, varying in size from 40 to 
1,600 acres, the range in carefully kept costs of the various operations 
amounted to: 



Table 157. — Showing Range in Operation Costs op Producing Barley 



Operations 



Range in Cost 



Average Cost 



Preparing land by plowing and cultivating $0. 86 to $2 . 90 

Seed, sowing, and harrowing in 0. 91 to 2. 13 

Heading 0.67 to 2.23 

Threshing • 1 . 40 to 5 . 09 

Hauling 0.15 to 5.25 

Sundries, as weeding 0. 03 to 1 . 34 



$1.78 
1.37 
1.09 
2.80 
1.10 
0.56 



* California. 



408 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Methods of Procedure in Making Cost of Production Studies. — 
Widespread interest in cost of producing farm products resulted in a 
calling together by the U. S. D. A. of representative investigators in 
farm management and farm economics. ^^ The conference was held in 
Washington, D. C, February 20-26, 1919, and resulted in a recommended 
plan^^ to be used in conducting cost of production studies. 

As this report probably represents the best of its kind, the outline is 
given in full. 

Cost of Production Studies 
Purpose of Cost of Production Studies 

From the standpoint of the individual farmer the primary purposes are: 

1. To record the details of the farm business for reference. 

2. To give an insight into the elements and interrelations of the different farm 
activities. 

3. To furnish information that may enable the farmer to reduce costs, or otherwise 
increase profits. 

4. To make possible a comparison of the profitableness of the different enterprises 
and combinations of enterprises. 

The records secured by cost of production studies give data for analyzing the farm 
business, and thus are of fundamental importance in the whole program of agricultural 
research and education. The results of such studies on a number of farms where a 
given type of farming is practised are useful not only to the farmers from whose farms 
the results were obtained, but are of value in showing other farmers how to improve 
their methods. 

From the standpoint of the public, cost of production studies provide the facts 
which give a basis for intelligent judgment upon the probable effects of any given 
legislation or other public activity upon the farmer as a producer and as a citizen. 
Cost of production studies are therefore one of the means of providing the basic facts 
needed by legislators and price commissioners in comparing the profits of competing 
lines of production and estimating necessary values. 

Methods of Cost Investigation 

There are three ways of obtaining cost data — cost accounting, survey method, 
questionnaire sent by mail. The accounting method is based on complete records of 
all farm work and business transactions. Arrangements are made with farmers to 
keep detailed records of all operations and transactions in connection with the farm 
business. The work is supervised by personal visits to the farm. It is desirable that 
cost accounts be kept to obtain basic data. Cumulative results of such work become 
increasingly valuable. 

By the survey method the necessary data are obtained from farmers by trained 
investigators. Some of the data are taken from the farmer's books and the books of 
persons to whom the farmer sells and from whom he buys; some from his bin, silo, 
and building capacities; and some of the data are based on estimates made by the 
farmer. 

Some of the advantages of the survey method are, (1) it is a relatively inexpensive 
method of securing records from large numbers of farms, (2) records are obtained from 
all classes of farms, and (3) records are obtained after the close of the farm year, so 
that, when desired, areas more representative of normal conditions may be chosen. 
By the survey method it is sometimes difficult to determine the amount of general 
expense and miscellaneous labor, and the proper basis for apportioning such items to 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 409 

different enterprises. Unless the investigator is thoroughly experienced in the 
subject that he is studying, some items of importance may be omitted. 

Both methods are useful and reliable when the work is carefully conducted. 
Either method may be used, but preferably both should be used. The detailed 
cost accounts serve as a check on the survey work, and the survey work shows the 
relationship of the farms on which cost accounts are kept to the average farm. 

The questionnaire sent by mail can be used to advantage in securing supple- 
mentary data from a large number of farmers. To secure the best results the question- 
naire should cover only a limited number of cost items and the questions should 
be direct and clear. 

Cost Items 

The items to be considered in cost of production studies will depend upon the 
enterprise under consideration. When the survey method is used it is essential that 
the list be complete enough so that no items will be omitted by either the farmer or 
the investigator. When the accounting method is used a classification that is broad 
enough to include all charges is needed, but the cost items will be developed in the 
working out of the records and will vary with the enterprise. 

The following grouping is suggested for farm cost accounting work: 

Farm Enterprise Costs 

Direct charges to farm enterprise accounts: 
Labor 

Man labor (including labor of men, women, and children) 
Animal labor 

Mechanical labor (tractor and truck) 
Materials 

Crop materials 
Seed 

Fertilizer 
Twine 
Sprays 
Stock materials 
Feed 
Bedding 
Cash 

Selling 
Insurance 
Taxes 
Threshing 
Veterinary 
Breeding fees 
Investment 

Depreciation of investment in live stock 
Interest on investment in live stock 
Indirect charges to farm enterprise accounts (consisting of labor, material, 
cash, and investment costs that can not be charged as such to enterprise 
accounts, but which may be assembled under definite headings and 
distributed on the basis of use). 
Use of mechanical equipment; labor, materials, cash, and investment charges 

pertaining to mechanical equipment. 
Use of buildings (and similar improvements); labor, materials, cash, and 
investment charges pertaining to buildings. 



410 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Use of land and land improvements; labor, materials, cash and investment 

charges pertaining to land and land improvements. 
Special charges; manure, lime, breeding males, perennial crops. 
General expenses or overhead; labor, materials, ca.sh, and investment 

charges that can not be charged direct or assembled under the other 

indirect cost headings. 

Man Labor. — -The rate for man labor charges should be determined by computing 
the cost of wages, board, and other perquisites for both monthly and daily labor, 
including the services of the farmer for labor and supervision at the rate for which 
another man could be hired to take his place. The total sum divided by the total 
number of hours gives the rate. Family labor should be charged at the amount it 
would cost to have the same work done by hired help. 

In the case of crops or enterprises in which a large amount of labor is hired at a 
rate considerably higher or lower than the average rate, such labor should be charged 
at the actual rate paid rather than the average rate of all labor for the year. 

Author's Note. — Use of an average rate based on all yearly labor require- 
ments — monthly and daily — does away with any question of distribution of labor 
over crops. In the case of potato and apple harvests on the same farm confliction 
might result in the monthly men being put at potato digging while the day men are 
given the apple picking work. The rates for day men are greater than the monthly 
rate because of the premium asked for the short time jobs and because the demand is 
usually greater when extra labor is needed so that if each class of labor were charged 
directly the apples must bear a higher cost, even though the monthly men might be 
fully qualified to do the apple work. To avoid this difficulty a flat average rate is 
used. Objection to this method will occur when specially trained men are employed 
to do work that the regular hands can not handle equally successfully. In the event 
of employing specially skilled fruit packers, for instance, the extra cost should be 
charged directly against the crop concerned and not against the entire enterprise. 

Horse Labor. — Horse labor charges should be based on hourly rates, computed for 
an entire year for the work stock, by determining and adding care; feed; bedding; 
blacksmith; veterinary; direct cash expenditures not otherwise enumerated; interest; 
depreciation and upkeep of shelter; interest and depreciation on stock; less credits, as 
for appreciation, manure, and occasional outside work. If outside work is an impor- 
tant enterprise or if colts are raised, separate accounts should be kept. 

Purchased Supplies. — Purchased supplies should be charged at cash cost including 
freight. The farm labor cost of handling and preparation for use should be charged 
to the proper labor account. 

Supplies Produced on the Farm. — For supplies produced on the farm more or less 
arbitrary figures must be used. 

Farm Seeds. — Farm-grown products used for seed should be charged at the prices 
at which the crops from which they were taken are credited. Any additional labor 
costs of handling or preparing them for use should be charged to the proper labor 
account. 

Stock Feeds. — Purchased feed should be charged cash cost including any freight. 
The fariji cost of hauling should be charged to the proper labor account. Home-grown 
feeds that are readily marketable, when they enter into the production of another 
farm product, should be charged at the farm sale value; the farm sale value should 
ordinarily be based upon the average price during the period of feeding. 

Crops grown solely for animal feed and having no market value should be charged 
at cost of production. 

Either one or the other of the above principles, according to circumstances, should 
govern in determining the charge for silage. 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 411 

Charge on permanent pasture should be in accordance with the principle used in 
determining land charge. 

Home-grown products, such as straw, stover, beet tops, pasture of growing grain, 
etc., should be charged at market value, if there be such; if the number of sales in the 
community is not sufficient to establish market prices, they should be charged at their 
appraised value. 

Selling. — Selling expenses covering actual payments should be charged directly to 
the department involved. 

Insurance. — Insurance premiums should be charged directly to the department 
involved, at the annual rate paid. 

Taxes. — Taxes should be charged directly to the enterprise or department involved. 

Implements. — The annual cost of each implement or group of implements should 
be based on a determination giving the yearly sum covering the expenses, as repairs, 
fuels, lubricants, labor of upkeep, depreciation, interest, and insurance, less credits 
as for machinery hired out. This charge is then to be apportioned to each enterprise 
on the basis of use, which may be stated in hours, acres, or other suitable base unit. 

Authoh's Note. — Some farm managers lump all machinery charges into a single 
sum and apportion to the various enterprises according to the hours of productive 
horse labor. This is the method used in Farm Survey work by the U. S. D. A. It con- 
stitutes a short cut in handling the rather difficult task of apportioning. Obviously, 
prorating according to actual use is generally preferable. It is better to charge the use 
of potato planter and potato digger directly to that crop, the broadcaster and the 
binder to the wheat crop, than to lump the total charges and prorate a portion of the 
potato implements to the wheat crop and vice versa. Use of the lump method and 
division according to horse hours is, however, entirely feasible when the class of crops 
is such that the equipment is generally used for all, or in single phase farming when one 
primary crop or product constitutes the entire farming enterprise. 

For situations not permitting individual calculations of machinery charges and cost 
of horse labor, present and future tables compiled over sufficient ground to give an 
insight into general terms may be used, but such should be accepted with caution 
and only after considerable study to determine their applicability to the specific case. 
It is hoped that the future may bring about compilations of this sort for use under 
conditions not permitting individual determinations. This thought applies especially 
to costs of horse labor and proper charges for machinery use. 

Farm Improvements. — -The charge for the use of farm improvements, including 
buildings, water systems, etc., consists of interest on investment, depreciation, 
maintenance, repairs, taxes, and insurance. The sum of these annual charges on each 
building and improvement should be distributed as a cost item on the basis of the use 
made of the improvements. The annual charge for the use of a building intended for 
a specific purpose which has been abandoned should be carried as a cost against such 
other enterprise as may utilize it at its value for that purpose. If no use is made of 
the building, the annual charge should go directly to the profit and loss account. 

Land and Land Improvements. — Land charge covers the value of the use of the land, 
including drains, fences, and irrigation systems. The charge is made up of interest 
on investment, taxes, upkeep of drains, etc. 

In determining the interest item, both land value and interest rate are involved. 
Prevailing local prices of land, exclusive of buildings, should be taken as the land value, 
and the prevailing rate of interest at which money may be borrowed on well-secured 
farm loans as the interest rate. In localities where such influences as speculation or 
discovery of oil or use for town lots has affected the price of land, the rental value may 
be taken into consideration in determining a fair charge for the use of the land. When 
dealing with the farm as a whole, this method applies to farms operated under any and 
all forms of tenure. In determining costs and returns to tenant and landlord, the 



412 FARM MANAGEMENT 

actual terms of the contract should be considered. It is desirable on tenant farms that 
the records be so kept as to show separate statements for landlord and tenant and a 
combined statement for the entire farm. 

Manure should be charged at a value indicated by the farmer's experience based 
on increased crop profits, or market- values. 

Green Manure. — Green-manure crops should be charged at the cost of production. 

Perennial Crops. — In general the cost of establishing a crop or bringing it to bearing 
age should be charged annually over the probable productive life of the crop. 

General expense or overhead may be defined as the sum of those expenses which can 
not be charged directly Or apportioned on the basis of use, but which must be appor- 
tioned by arbitrary means. 

No charges should be included in general expense or overhead that can be 
distributed by any other method. General expense or overhead should be distributed 
to the farm enterprise on the basis of direct costs (labor, materials, and cash cost) or 
on the basis which offers the best measure of its use. 

Interest. — The interest charge for investment in live stock, machinery, and other 
equipment, including cash working capital, should be at the actual rate paid for 
money borrowed, or at the prevailing rate of interest at which money may be borrowed 
on well-secured farm loans. 

Residual Values. — With materials having a residual value (as manures, fertilizers, 
lime, etc.), the entire cost of application should be distributed to the crops of that 
year in proportion to the benefits derived from the general fertilizer practice on the 
farm in question. Where the farm is operated on a definite plan, this proportion is 
to be determined by the investigator. 

Example with manure: 

In a 4-year rotation on retentive clay soil, the proportions might be 40-30-20- 

10. 
In a 4-year rotation on open sandy soil, the proportions might be 50-40-10- 0. 

WTiere the farming is not according to a definite plan, a part of the cost proportional 
to the residual effect may be charged against the crops of succeeding years. 

Business Risks 

There are many classes of business risks, such as risk from fire, floods, drought, 
hail, disease, pests, employers' liability. When insurance is carried it is usually not 
for the full value, so that the farm carries the balance of the risk. 

When insurance is paid for any business risk it should be charged to the proper 
account. If not paid, no charge is made, but the profits of the industry should be 
sufficient to cover uninsured business risks. 

Interpretation of Results 

Various points of view are held by accountants as to the place in the accounts for 
interest, the charge for the operator's labor, and as to the methods of charging farm- 
produced supplies. These differences in method have arisen because of the different 
purposes for which accounts are kept. Some public accountants omit interest and a 
charge for the operator's labor as cost items and include them as allowances, and 
produced supplies are often charged at cost. 

In farm cost accounting it is desirable that the time of the farmer, the value of 
the farm-grown products, and the charge for the use of capital, all be included as cost, 
in order that comparisons may be made between different farm enterprises. The 
statement of results, however, should show the details of these and all other charges 
so that the exact amount of the cost due to each item may be seen. The facts can 
then be arranged by anyone in accordance with the form in which he desires to express 
the data. 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 413 

Examples of Costs of Producing Field Crops 

Unless one is fully acquainted with the items making up costs and 
the conditions under which they were collected, the data are likely to 
be of but limited use. During the past few years an increasing number 
of publications primarily concerned with cost of production data have 
appeared, and references to cost data and to the inclusion of cost figures 
are as numerous as ways of producing crop and handling animals. 

Reporting Items in Terms of Time or Quantity. — Since labor rates — 
both horse and man — are subject to wide fluctuations not only in various 
parts of the country but from year to year, costs given in dollars are rather 
unsafe guides to follow. Where the measure of time or quantity is used, 
the resulting data are of far more value, as it is an easy matter to ascribe 
existing values at the going rate and determine a figure for prevailing 
conditions. 

For instance, knowledge that winter-pruning a 12-year old apple orchard averages 
55K man-hours per acre; or that arsenate of lead spraying at 5 lb. per 100 gal., 
requires 6 gal. per tree for 15-year pears per application and takes 7}4 man-hours and 
5}4 horse-hours for each spraying; is of more real value for future use than a statement 
that the cost is $12.30 and S2.10 respectively. 

Costs should be given in terms of time and quantity whenever 
possible. 

Continued changing rates for man and horse labor and changing costs 
of materials used in production make statements of costs when given in 
dollars and cents of minor value. They do, however, present an idea of 
the comparative costs when comparable products are discussed. 

Costs of Producing Field Crops 
Nebraska Costs : Corn, Wheat, Oats, Hay : 1909-10. — Studies in the 
cost of producing corn, wheat, oats and hay in Nebraska from data 
gathered by correspondence with farmers during 1909 and 1910, included 
operating costs of production, 5 per cent on the market value of the land, 
and taxes, but did not take into consideration the marketing of the crop. 
The detailed and total costs amounted to:^^ 

Table 158. — Detailed Costs of Producing Corn — Nebraska 

Average 344 farms, 
1909-10 

Interest and taxes (or rent) $ 4 . 938 

Plowing 1 . 276 

Harrowing . 324 

Discing . 444 

Seed 0.282 

Planting 0.401 

Cultivating 1 . 459 

Harvesting 1 . 559 

Interest and depreciation on machinery 0. 342 

Miscellaneous 0. 602 

Total cost per acre $11 .627 

Yield per acre 39 . 3 bu. 

Cost per bushel 29.6ji 



414 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Table 159. — Detailed Costs of Producing Wheat — Nebraska 



Average 289 farms, 
1909-10 

Interest and taxes (or rent) $4 . 780 

Plowing 1 . 272 

Harrowing . 282 

Disking 0. 423 

Seed 1.401 

Seeding 0.421 

Harvesting 2 . 283 

Interest and depreciation on machinery 0. 595 

Miscellaneous 0.731 

Total cose per acre $12 . 188 

Yield per acre 22 . 2 bu. 

Cost per bushel 54 . 9 fi 

Table 160. — Summary of Costs of Producing Crops — Nebraska, Average, 

1909 AND 1910 



Yield per acre 



Cost per acre 



Cost per bushel 
or per ton 



Corn. . . . 
Wheat. . . 
Oats .... 
Wild hay 
Clover. . . 
Alfalfa. . . 



39.3 bu. 

22.2 bu. 

35.0bu. 
1 . 25 tons 
2.04 tons 
3 . 33 tons 



$11,627 

12.188 

11.385 

6.722 

S.538 

10.330 



$0 . 926 per bushel 
0.549 per bushel 
0.325 per bushel 
5 . 37 per ton 
4. 18 per ton 
3.10 per ton 



Minnesota Costs : Barley, Clover, Corn, Ensilage, Flaxseed, Hay, 
Hemp, Mangels, Potatoes: 1902-1907. — Cost of producing Minnesota 
crops on the State Experiment Station farm, studied during 1902-1907,^* 
were found to be: 
Table 161. — Detailed Costs of Producing Fall Plowed Barley — Minnesota 

Cost per acre 

Seed $0,685 

Cleaning seed 0. 049 

Plowing 1 . 130 

Dragging 0.312 

Seeding 0.293 

Cutting 0.364 

Twine 0. 232 

Shocking 0. 156 

Stacking 0.511 

Stack threshing (labor) 0.320 

Threshing, cash cost . 480 

Machinery cost . 371 

Land rental 2 . 100 

Total $7. 003 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 



415 



Table 162. — Detailed Costs of Producing Corn — Husked from Standing 

Stalks — Minnesota 



Item 



Northfield 


Marshall 


(Rice County) 


(Lyon County) 


Cost per acre 


Cost per acre 


$0,226 


$0,190 


0.026 


0.025 


1.311 


1.171 


0.544 


0.439 


0.240 


0.255 


1.806 


1.453 




0.119 


3.456 


2.473 


0.549 


0.537 


3.500 


3.000 



Seed 

Shelling seed 

Plowing 

Dragging 

Planting (horse planter) 

Cultivating 

Weeding 

Husking 

Machinery cost 

Land rental 

Total 



1.658 



$9 . 662 



Table 163. — Detailed Costs op Producing Ensilage — Minnesota Agricultural 
Experiment Station, 1905-1907 



Item 



Seed 

Plowing 

Dragging 

Planting 

Cultivating .* 

Cutting (corn binder) 

Twine (714 1b.) 

Hauling from field. 

Loading, feeding, packing 

Coal (19,898 1b.) 

Rental, power machinery 23 Vg 
days 



Cost 
per 



$0,436 
1.311 
0.531 
0.295 
1.218 
0.662 
0.589 
2.606 
1.632 
0.499 

1 . 628 



Item 



Value consumed in ensilage cutter 

Interest on silo investment 

Silo depreciation (150 ton) 

Farm machinery cost 

Land rental 

Total 



Cost 
per 
acre 



$0,666 
0.533 
1.333 
1.748 
3.500 

$19,187 



416 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Table 164. — Detailed Costs of Producing Timothy and Clover Hat — 

Minnesota 

FIRST CROP 



Item 


Northfield 
(Rice County) 


Marshall 
(Lyon County) 


Halstad (Nor- 
man County) 




Cost per acre 


Cost per acre 


C ost per acre 


Seed 


$0,293 
0.368 
0.178 
0.199 
1.099 

0.548 
3.500 


$0,293 
0.328 
0.213 

1.242 
0.477 
3.000 


$0 293 


Mowing 


363 


Raking 

Cocking and spreading. 

Hauling in 

Hauling in and stacking 

Machinery cost 

Land rental 


0.248 

1 . 273 
0.290 
2.100 


Total first crop 


$6,185 $5,553 


$4,567 





SECOND CROP 


Item 


Northfield (Rice County) 


Cost per acre 



Mowing 

Raking 

Cocking and spreading 

Hauling in 

Total second crop 

Total cost of two cuttings at Northfield 



$0,264 
0.115 
0.150 
0.464 

0.993 

$7,178 



Table 165. — Detailed Costs of Producing Potatoes om Fertilized Soil- 
Minnesota 



Item 





Cost 
per 



Spring plowing 

Harrowing (4 times) . . . , 
Cost of seed (3,360 bu.) 

Cutting seed 

Treating seed 

Corrosive sublimate. . . . 

Planting 

Fertilizers (25 tons) 

Weeding 

Cultivating (3 times) . . 
Spraying (4 times) 



51.017 
0.765 
8.472 
0.376 
0.120 
0.277 
0.689 
6.500 
0.327 
1.814 
0.446 



Paris green 

Lime 

Bluestone 

Digging 

Picking up 38,300 bu 

Wages and board '. . 

Hauling, sorting, and storing . 

Machinery cost 

Land rental 



II . 833 

1.810 

6.362 

3.317 

.596 

3.000 



Total $37,721 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 



417 



South Carolina Costs : Cotton, Com, Oats, Hay, Cowpea Seed, Wheat : 
1914-15. — A study in Anderson County, South CaroHna, resulted in 
findings as to cost of production and farm value as follows:''^ 



Table 166. — Costs Compared with Farm 


Values of Crops- 


—South Carolina 


Item 


Cotton 
per pound 
gross lint 


Corn per 
bushel 


Oats per 
bushel 


Oat hay 
per ton 


Cowpea 

hay per 

ton 


Cowpea 

seed per 

bushel 


Wheat 

per 
bushel 


Cost 

Farm value 


$0.1089 
0.1150 


$1,001 

0.983 


$0,433 

0.657 


$13.88 
23.97 


$14.10 
19.17 


$2.95 
1.98 


$1 . 34 
1.29 



Five-sixths of the cotton, four-fifths of the corn, and seven-eighths 
of the oats and oat hay were grown either by the owners of the land or 
under their immediate supervision. 

Table 167. — Itemized Distribution of Costs Summarized in Table 166 



Itemized 
costs 



Gross 












lint 

cotton 

per 


Corn 

per 

bushel 


Oats 

per 

bushel 


Oat hay 
per ton 


Cowpea 

hay per 

ton 


Cowpea 

seed per 

bushel 


pound 













Wheat 

per 
bushel 



Rent 

Man labor 

Interest on work- 
ing 

Mule labor 

Implement cost. . 

Seed 

Fertilizer 

Miscellaneous... . 

Total 



$0.0154 
0.0448 

0.0015 
0.0220 
0.0031 
0.0017 
0.0174 
0.0030 



$0.1089 



10.210 
0.305 

0.011 
0.242 
0.036 
0.008 
0.189 



$1,001 



SO. 075 
0.094 

0.004 
0.082 
0.016 
0.050 
0.091 
0.021 



$0,433 



$2.86 
3.25 

0.16 
2.85 
0.47 
1.66 
2.56 
0.07 



$13.88 



$3 . 08 
3.31 

0.13 
3.61 
0.58 
2.91 

0.06 



$13.68 



BO. 42 
1.61 

0.05 
0.54 
0.09 
0.21 

0.03 



$2.95 



$0.25 
0.31 

0.02 
0.30 
0.04 
0.13 
0.21 
0.08 



$1.34 



Texas Costs : Cotton, Corn, Oats, Hay, Sorghums : 1914. — Costs on 

114 farms in Ellis County, Texas, were found to average:^ 

Table 168. — Per Acre Cost, Value, and Yield of Various Crops (114 Farms, 

Ellis County, Texas) 



Crop 



Cost per acre 



Value per acre 



Yield per acre 



Cotton. . 
Corn. . . . 
Oats. . . . 
Oat hay. 
Sorghum 
Alfalfa. . 



$22.65 
14.92 
10.44 
13.12 
20.77 
26.80 



$30.60 
20.76 
9.91 
12.59 
33.03 
38.57 



241.0 1b. 

25.6 bu. 

19.7 bu. 
0.94 tons 
2.8 tons 
2.51 tons 



418 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Kentucky Costs : Tobacco, Stock, Dairy, Mixed : 1913. — Costs in Ken- 
tuckj^ were found to run :" 

Table 169. — Costs of Kentucky Crops 



Type of farm 


Corn, per 
bushel 


Tobacco, per 
pound 


Wheat, per 
bushel 


Rye, per 
bushel 


Meadow hay, 
per ton 




Cost 


Value 


Cost 


Value 


Cost 


Value 


Cost Value 


Cost 


Value 


Tobacco 

Tobacco stock 


$0.76 
0.71 
0.73 
0.65 
0.64 
0.81 


$0.76 
0.76 
0.76 
0.76 
0.76 
0.76 


$0,113 
0.123 
0.130 


$0,118 
0.119 
0.116 


$0.73 
0.88 
0.75 
0.84 
0.98 
0.68 


$0.98 
0.98 
0.98 
0.98 
0.98 
0.98 


$1.33 
1.04 
1.01 
1.01 
1.22 


$0.84 
0.84 
0.84 
0.84 
0.84 
0.84 


$16.67 
16.00 
15.27 
18.94 
22.50 
18.16 


$16.06 
16.06 
16.06 


Stock with tobacco 


0.120 


0.117 


16.06 
16.06 


Dairy 


0.127 


0.104 


16.06 




$0.68 


$0.76 


$0,127 


$0,118 


$0.80 


$0.98 


$1.05 


$0.84 


$17.75 


$16.06 







Georgia Costs : Com, Oats, Sugar Cane, Potatoes, Watermelons : 
1914. — Investigations into cost of growing crops in Brooks County, 
Georgia^^ resulted in findings as follows: 

Table 170. — -Costs of Georgia Crops 



Crop 



Land 
rent 



Man 
labor 


Mule 
labor 


Imple- 
ment 
cost 


Inter- 
est on 
cash 


Seed 


$ 4.10 


$ 3.14 


$0.63 


$0.07 


$ 0.11 


1.91 


1.86 


0.38 


0.03 


0.84 


36.39 


14.12 


2.88 


0.70 


10.91 


6.76 


4.73 


1.26 


0.20 


8.22 


7.22 


4.92 


0.98 


0.15 


0.55 



Fertil- 
izer 



Special 
costs 



Total 



Corn i $2.86 

Oats 2.00 

3.45 
5.00 
2.93 



Sugar cane. . . 
Irish potatoes. 
Watermelons. . 



5 1.88 

0.33 

7.12 

10.58 

7.73 



$1.14 
7.35 
0.62 
0.87 



$12.79 

8.71 

85.92 

37.37 

25.35 



Missouri Costs : Corn, Oats, Wheat, Rye, Clover, Timothy and Alfalfa 
Hay, Soy Beans, and Cowpea Hay. — From studies conducted in Missouri 
from 1910-1917 and published in 1919, Johnson and Green^^ worked out 
some of the factors causing variations in cost figures and the average 
costs of producing corn, oats, wheat, rye, clover hay, timothy hay, alfalfa 
hay, soy beans and cowpea hay. The figures, taken from cost-account 
records, give the costs averaged for the years 1910-11-12-13, and then 
exhibited yearly for 1914-15-16-17, with an average for the total 8 years. 
The findings show the following: 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 

Table 171. — Costs of Missouri Crops 



419 



Crop 


Average yield 


Unit of 
measure 


Range in costs 
years 1910-11- 
12-13 averaged; 
years 1914-15-16 
-17 individually 


Average 


Crop 

paid 

net for 

each 10 

hours* 


Corn in farm crib. . . 


27.8 bu. 


Per acre 
Per bushel 


$13.64-S22.20 
0.47- 0.83 


$15.98 
0.57 


$2.26 


Oats in farm bin. . . . 


26.18bu. 


Per acre 
Per bushel 


9.45- 15.12 1 11.11 I 
0.35- 0.51 0.42 1.17 


Wheat in sack at 
farm 


12.5 bu. 


Per acre 
Per bushel 


11.51- 17.06 
0.78- 1.54 


13.31 
1.06 1.06 


Rye at farm 


13 bu. 


Per acre 
Per bushel 


9.37- 12.46 10.67 
0.74- 1.07 0.82 


4.05 


Clover hay loose in 
stack 


89 tons 


Per acre 
Per ton 


5.93- 8.80 
6.62- 8.80 


7.22 

8.11 4 48 






Timothy hay loose in 
stack 


99 tons 


Per acre 
Per ton 


5.28- 8.06 
6.07- 8.58 


6.71 

6.79 7.59 


Alfalfa hay loose in 
stack 


2.12 tons 


Per acre 
Per ton 


16.96- 27.94 
6.61- 12.35 


19.80 
9.34 


4.92 


Soybeans 


6.20 bu. 


Per acre 
Per bushel 


12.39- 16.83 
1 . 82- 3 . 34 


14.28 
2.30 




Cowpea hay 


1 . 40 tons 


Per acre 
Per ton 


11.53- 16.64 
8.32- 13.29 


13.53 
9.66 





* Per day of man labor spent upon it. 

The bulletin records details of rent, horse labor, man labor, equip- 
ment, fertilizers, seed, yields, and returns for each 10 hours of labor spent 
in producing, measured when possible in terms of quantity as well as cash. 

Costs of Producing Sugar Beets. — In a manuscript prepared by 
members of the Office of Farm Management, U. S. D. A., for the annual 
meeting of the sugar beet interests held during January, 1919, compre- 
hensive data are presented relating to the cost of producing sugar beets, 
obtained by the survey method from 1,025 farms in 13 important districts 
located in six states. Of the records collected, 284 apply to the 1914 crop, 
660 to the 1915 crop, and 81 to the 1916 crop This paper, written by 
L. A. Moorehouse and T. H. Summers, utilized the data from U. S. D. A. 
Bulletins 693, 726, and 748, joint contributions from the office of Farm 



420 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Management and the Bureau of Plant Industry, dated respectively, July 
16, 1918, Dec. 14, 1918 and Jan. 28, 1919, each the joint work of four 
authors, the names of L. A. Moorehouse, T. H. Summers, and R. S. Wash- 
burn being common to all, while J. W. Jones, S. B. Nickols, and C. O. 
Townsend each contributed to one. 

The money values apply only to the crop years 1914 and 1915; the 
factors of man labor, horse labor, seed, fertilizer, manure, etc., can be 
applied to any farm year. 

The items of cost are grouped under three major headings: Labor, 
Materials, and Other Costs. The first group includes all the labor, man 
and horse, expended on the crop; the second embraces seed, manure, com- 
mercial fertilizers, and irrigation water; the last takes in insurance, taxes, 
interest, machinery, rent, and miscellaneous. This last item covers all 
other charges against the crop and is referred to as overhead. No 
allowance has been made for supervision. The operator has been allowed 
hired man's wages for his time expended on the crop. 

Table No 172 gives the items which enter into the cost of producing 
an acre of beets. In so far as possible these items are expressed in quan- 
tities, such as hours of labor, pounds of seed, tons of manure, and pounds 
of commercial fertilizer. The remaining items are given in money values. 

The various items represent the cos.t per acre for every acre of sugar 
beets produced, the result being the total cost divided by the number of 
acres grown. For example, in the Greeley area of Colorado the applica- 
tion of manure per acre covered was 18.6 tons. However, only 46.8 per 
cent of the sugar beet acreage received this application. When the total 
amount is distributed over the entire acreage, only 8.52 tons per acre are 
chargeable against the crop. 

An estimate was obtained from each grower of the acres covered with 
manure, while the rate of application and the value of the manure in the 
barnyard were also obtained from him. From these the cost of the ma- 
nure per acre, exclusive of the labor of applying it to the land, was arrived 
at. The proportion of this charge against the beet crop depended on 
whether the application was on the beet crop or whether 1 or 2 years had 
elapsed since the land in beets had received manure. In the first instance 
50 per cent of the value of the manure was charged, in the second 30 
per cent, and in the third 20 per cent. It was assumed that the effect 
of the manure would practically disappear in 3 years. 

Commercial fertilizers were used only in the Michigan and Ohio areas. 
The actual application per acre treated varied from 130 to 170 lb. When 
charged against the total number of acres of sugar beets produced, the 
charge per acre was from 58 to 102 lb. 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 



421 



Table 172. — Cost of Producing an Acre of Sugar Beets and the Total Cost 

PER Acre and per Ton 

Segregation of costs 



Locality 



Labor 



Man 
hours 



Horse 
hours 



Materials 



Other costs 



Seed, * 


Ma- 


pounds 


nure, 




tons 


15.6 


2,18 


15.5 


2.73 


14.2 


2.89 


15.2 


0.79 


18.0 


8.52 


21.1 


6.71 


21.7 


4.39 


14.9 


7.70 


14.7 


6.40 


14.5 


6.40 


20.7 


0.83 


16.6 


0.96 


14.6 


0.27 



Com- 
mercial 
fertilizer, 
pounds 



Irri- 
gation, 
water 



Insur- 
ance 
and 
taxes 



Inter- 
est 
and 
rent 



Ma- 
chin- 
ery 



Miscel- 
laneous 



Caro, Mich 

Alma, Mich 

Grand Rapids, Mich 
Northwestern Ohio. 

Greeley, Colo 

Fort Morgan, Colo. . 
Rocky Ford, Colo. . . 

Provo, Utah 

Garland, Utah 

Idaho Falls, Idaho. . 
Los Angeles, Cal. . . . 

Oxnard, Cal 

Salinas, Cal 



105.5 
114.8 
111.3 
113.4 
123.9 
118.1 
117.3 
130.8 
133.3 
119.4 
87.7 
79.5 
101.2 



80.0 
95.3 
93.9 
79.1 
104.5 
103.0 
132.7 
117.1 
98.5 
79.3 
109.3 
111.5 
124.3 



90 

63 

102 

58 



SO. 51 
0.57 
0.50 
0.49 
0.93 
1.47 
0.55 



1.50 



$1.00 
0.80 
0.92 
0.91 
0.85 
1.05 
0.74 
1.95 
1.16 
1.67 
1.98 
1.97 
1.04 



5 6.65 
11.69 
8.25 
13.79 
21.21 
16.65 
16.87 
17.77 
16.09 
13.28 
26.66 
17.85 
21.22 



$2.07 
2.45 



3.41 
4.00 
2.80 
2.50 
3.25 



$1.10 
1.24 
1.21 
1.12 
1.41 
1.29 
1.32 
1.35 
1.43 
1.27 
1.04 
0.95 
1.19 



* Includes seed for replanting if charged to the growers. 



Total Costs Per Acre 



Number 
of records 



Acres in 
sugar 
beets 



Yield per 
acre 



Total costs 



Per acre Per ton 



Caro, Michigan 

Alma, Michigan 

Grand Rapids, Michigan 
Northwestern Ohio 

Greeley, Colorado 

Fort Morgan, Colorado. . 
Rocky Ford, Colorado. . . 

Provo, Utah 

Garland, Utah 

Idaho Falls, Idaho 

Los Angeles, California. . 

Oxnard, California 

Salinas, California 



134 
53 
36 
97 

195 

66 

106 

58 
79 
36 

81 
45 
39 



2,018 
506 
231 

1,525 

5,028 
2,456 
2,429 

833 

1,461 

735 

7,712 
2,811 
3,616 



9.72 
11.40 
10.16 
13.17 

15.57 
13.65 
12.99 

14.96 
14.85 
13.62 

14 . 52 

9.53 

15.59 



$47.65 
57.42 
53.05 
56.04 

72.53 
65.00 

64.87 

69.59 
69.03 

62.68 

67.11 

54.88 
66.45 



S5.62 
5.04 
5.21 

4.26 

4.66 
4.76 
4.99 

4.65 
4.65 
4.60 

4.62 
5.76 
4.26 



422 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



The lowest individual cost of production was $2.54 per ton, the 
highest cost was $18.16 a ton, while the average cost per ton for all 
districts was $4.70. Seventy-three and five-tenths per cent of the growers 
had a cost of from $4.00 to $6.00 per ton, while the three groups from 
$4.00 to $5.00 represented 54.5 per cent of the growers interviewed. 

Table 173. — Rates Used in Computing Certain Cost Items in Sugar Beet 

Production 



Areas 



Farm 
year 



Man 
labor 
rate 



Horse 
labor 
rate 



Land value and interest rate 



Values 
of 
best 
land 
per 
acre 



Inter- 
est 



land 



Interest 
on money 



Cost 

of 

seed 

per 

pound 



Michigan and Ohio 



Colorado. 



Utah and Idaho. 



California. 



Caro, Mich 

Caro, Mich 

Alma, Mich 

Grand Rapids, Mich 
Northwestern Ohio. 

Greeley 

Greeley 

Fort Morgan 

Rocky Ford 

Rocky Ford 

Provo, Utah 

Provo, Utah 

Garland, Utah 

Garland, Utah 

Idaho Falls, Idaho. 

Los Angeles 

Los Angeles 

Oxnard 

Oxnard 

Salinas 



1914 


$0.16 


$0.10 


»103 


6 


1915 


0.20 


0.10 


103 


6 


1915 


0.20 


0.10 


132 


6 


1915 


0.20 


0.10 


106 


6 


1915 


0.20 


0.10 


168 


6 


1914 


0.19 


0.11 


186 


73-2 


1915 


0.19 


0.11 


186 


7H 


1915 


0.20 


0.10 


142 


7K 


1914 


0.18 


0.10 


193 


9 


1915 


0.18 


0.10 


193 


9 


1914 


0.19 


0.10 


211 


8 


1915 


0.19 


0.10 


211 


8 


1914 


0.20 


0.09 


203 


8 


1915 


0.20 


0.09 


203 


8 


1915 


0.20 


0.10 


147 


8 


1915 


0.20 


0.10 


494 


7 


1916 


0.20 


0.10 


494 


7 


1915 


0.21 


0.10 


294 


7 


1916 


0.21 


0.10 


294 


7 


1916 


0.21 


0.10 


328 


7 



This is the 
interest on 

money 
borrowed 
to pay the 
beet help, 

and an 

individual 

rate was 

used for 

each farm. 



$0.15 
0.15 
0.15 
0.15 
0.15 

0.10 
0.10 
0.10 
0.10 
0.10 

0.15 
0.15 
0.15 
0.15 
0.15 

0.12 
0.12 
0.12 
0.12 
0.16 



Costs of Producing Cotton. Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, 
Texas: 1918. — In what was published first as a mimeographed report 
and later as a Bulletin^^ on the cost of producing cotton during 1918, 
based on 842 records collected in May and June of 1919 from selected 
counties of Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, and Texas, the United 
States Department of Agriculture, Office of Farm Management, outlines 
its findings for the items of the operator's labor, family labor, wage 
labor, contract labor, mule and horse labor; the value of seed, fertilizer, 
manure baskets, sheets and sacks used in picking cotton, and cash costs 
for ginning, bags, and ties. Charges were also made for use of land, use 
of machinery, insurance, taxes, and overhead expense. Information 
was secured concerning the receipts from cotton and from other crop and 
live stock enterprises on each farm. It was found that the receipts from 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 



423 



cotton lint and seed constituted from 75 to 95 per cent of the total farm 
receipts in nine of the districts visited. In one area the receipts from lint 
and seed formed only 45 per cent of the total farm receipts. The peanut 
ranked second as a source of income in the latter district. 

It was found that the average yield of lint cotton for all districts 
was 227 lb. per acre. It should be observed that there was a variation 
in yield from 78 lb. of lint cotton per acre for the lowest-producing 
ten farms, to 481 lb. of lint cotton per acre for the highest-producing 
ten farms. The yield of lint cotton per acre has a very important 
relation to the cost per pound. An operator producing 300 lb. of lint 
cotton per acre and having a cost of $60 per acre would have a decided 
advantage over his neighbor who produced only 150 lb. of lint at a cost 
of $45 per acre. In these two cases costs of 20 and 30^ per pound 
respectively are represented. 

Table 174. — Costs of Producing Cotton — Various States 



Locality 


Num- 
ber 
farms 


Acre- 
age 
repre- 
sented 


Range in cost 
per pound 


Aver- 
age 
cost 
for 

group, 

cents 
per 

pound 


Range 
yield, 
pounds 


Aver- 
age 
yield, 
pounds 


Greene Co., Ga 

Lawrence Co., Ga 

Sumter Co., Ga 


78 
85 
80 

108 

98 

113 

92 
91 

75 
75 


4,147.5 
3,968.0 

4,188.5 

3,935.5 

8,148.0 
2,568.0 


$0.08 to 0.41 
0.10 to 0.40 
0.11 to 0.38 

0.08 to 0.93 
0.11 to 0.62 
0.11 to 1.07 

0.08 to 0.51 
0.12 to 0.47 

0.14 to 0.34 
0.12 to 0.52 


22 
21 
20 

28 
33 
36 

26 
24 

20^^ 


133 to 450 
105 to 560 
112 to 469 

69 to 467 

125 to 457 

73 to 375 

150 to 417 
120 to 462 

100 to 288 
80 to 321 


260 

277 

244 


Dale Co., Ala 


194 


Marshall Co., Ala 

Tallapoosa Co., Ala 

Anderson Co., S. C 

Barnwell Co., S. C 

Ellis Co , Tex 


227* 
172* 

248 1 
268 

176 


Rusk Co., Tex 


185 







* Averaged for 90 farms, 
t Averaged for 89 farms. 

Georgia Cotton Costs: 1913-14. — From a study of 160 farms in Sumter 
County, Georgia, ^^ operated by white owners, cost of producing an acre 
of cotton averaged $30.74, or a cost per pound of lint of $0.1095. These 
costs were distributed over: 

Per cent 

Labor 48 . 4 

Use of land 21.7 

Fertilizer 17.8 

Miscellaneous 12 . 1 



424 FARM MANAGEMENT 

In Brooks County, Ga., the cost was found to be $34.51 per acre^^ 
divided among: 

Land rent $ 3 . 05 

Man labor 17.70 

Mule labor 5 . 53 

Implement cost 1 . 07 

Interest on cash . 35 

Seed 0.43 

Fertilizer 4 . 76 

Ginning, bagging, and ties 1 . 62 

$34.51 

Costs- of Producing Wheat. Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Minnesota, 
South Dakota, North Dakota: 1919. — In a mimeographed prehminary 
report of cost of producing wheat, covering findings on 481 farms for 
1919, the U. S. D. A. Office of Farm Management collected data from 
14 representative areas and interviewed at least 30 wheat growers in each 
of these areas. Nine of these districts were located in the winter wheat 
states of Kansas, Nebraska, and Missouri. The remaining five districts 
included three states in the spring wheat belt, namely, Minnesota, 
North Dakota, and South Dakota. The report is therefore based upon 
284 records from farms producing winter wheat and 197 records from 
farms growing spring wheat. 

In this survey 43,940 acres seeded to winter wheat and yielding 
635,124 bushels were used as a basis for computing costs, together with 
spring wheat records embracing 44,218 acres seeded, with a total produc- 
tion of 362,047 bushels. 

For the 481 farms covered in both the winter and the spring wheat 
areas, the average cost was found to be $2.15 per bushel, but ranged from 
$1.00 to $5.00, with the exception of 18 farms which recorded a cost in 
excess of $5.00. Three hundred fifty-four ranged from $1.30 to $2.80 
per bushel. 

Production cost in the winter wheat area averaged $1.87 per bushel but 
ranged from $1.00 to $8.20. Two hundred thirty-four farms of the 284 
total fell within the limits of $1.40 and $2.70 per bushel, inclusive. Only 
14 farms showed a cost above $3.30. 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 425 

Cost records by states and counties showed for winter wheat: 
Table 175. — Costs of Producing Winter Wheat — Various States 



County and state 


Number 

farms 
reporting 


Range in cost 
per bushel 


Average 
cost per 
bushel 


Ford County, Kansas 

Pawnee County, Kansas 


32 
32 
35 
30 
38 
29 
30 
23 
35 


$1.00 to $8.20 
1.10 to 3.60 
1.70 to 3.90 
1 . 40 to 2 . 20 
1.20 to 2.40 
1.20 to 5.20 
1 . 60 to 3 . 50 
1.00 to 3.10 
1 . 40 to 3 . 60 


$1.82 
1 85 


McPherson County, Kansas 

Jasper County, Missouri 

St. Charles County, Missouri 

Saline County, Missouri 

Phelps County, Nebraska 

Keith County, Nebraska 

Saline County, Nebraska 


2.38 
1.80 
1.74 
2.17 
2.20 
1.57 
2.19 









Data covering acreage harvested and production in bushels are 
furnished so that a comparison of yields and the influence of yield upon 
cost can be calculated. Yields range from a low of 2 bu. plus to a high 
of 25 bu. per acre. 

Production costs of the spring wheat averaged $2.65 per bushel, but 
ranged from $1.10 to $14.40. One hundred forty-five farms of the 197 
total fell within the limits of $1.90 and $3.90 per bushel, inclusive. 
Thirty-nine farms showed a cost above $4.00; the remaining 13 recording 
a cost below $1.90. 

Cost records by states and counties showed for spring wheat: 



Table 176. — Costs of Producing 


Spring Wheat — Various States 


County and state 


Number 

farms 
reporting 


Range in cost 
per bushel 


Average 
cost per 
bushel 


Clay County, Minnesota 

Traverse County, Minnesota 

Grand Forks County, North Dakota 

Morton County, North Dakota 


38 
42 
39 
39 
39 


$1 . 90 to $ 5 . 00 
1.90 to 4.90 
1.30 to 6.10 
1.60 to 14.40 
1.10 to 4.50 


$2.82 
2.80 
2.24 
4.26 


Spink County, South Dakota 


2.40 



Data are given showing acreage harvested and production in bushels 
for spring wheat region so that comparisons can be made showing 
influence of yield upon cost, and the marginal price necessary to main- 
tain production. Yields range from a low of one bushel to a high of 20 
bu. plus per acre. 



426 FARM MANAGEMENT 

The general averages for the records show : 

Table 177. — Costs of Producing Wheat — Various States 



Winter 

wheat, 

area 



Spring 

wheat, 

area 



All areas 



Number of records 

Average yield (bushels) . . . . 

Acres seeded 

Acres harvested 

Total production (bushels) 
Net cost: 

Per acre, dollars 

Per bushel, dollars 



284 

14.90 

43,940.00 

42,714.00 

635,124.00 

27.80 
1.87 



197 

8.40 

44,218.00 

42,847.00 

362,047.00 

22.40 
2.65 



481 

11.70 

88,158.00 

85,561.00 

997,171.00 

25.10 
2.15 



Costs of Producing California Field Crops: 1915 and 1919. — As a 

means of furnishing data to newcomers or to beginners so that they 
could possess a better understanding of the capital requirements involved 
in the growing of California crops, figures covering 36 field, fruit, and 
truck crops were collected for the years 1915 (representative of pre-war 
conditions) and 1919 (representing the first post-war year). Only the 
expenses are included that cover labor — horse and man, material (such 
as market packages, sprays, fertilizers), taxes, insurance, and selling 
expense. Interest on investment, and depreciation, are not covered by 
the figures. 

Detailed Statement. — A will statement of commercial methods in use 
accompanying the cost data serves to acquaint the reader with the condi- 
tions surrounding the costs. A sample follows: 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 427 

Table 178. — Detailed Operating Costs of Producing Alfalfa — California 



Basic data 
usual, normal, 

or pre-war 
prices (1915) 



Abnormal, 

unusually 

high, and war 

figures (1919) 



Market prices for land, per acre: 
Unplanted land: 

Best land : 

Fair land 

Planted — good stand: 

Best land .' 

Good land 

Fair land 

Costs of planting, per acre: 

Irrigating system or water right included in price of land: 

Leveling, checking and ditching 

Plowing, working down and preparing seed bed 

Seed 



Planting, either: 

Drilling 

Broadcasting, and brushing or harrowing in ... . 
Costs of growing — first year, per acre: 

Two mowings 

Two rakings 

Hauling off two crops and stacking 

Irrigating, water and labor, two crops 

Taxes and insurance 

Costs of growing after maturity annually: 

Upkeep of ditches and checks 

Irrigating, per acre: 

Water 

Labor 

Mowing, per acre, per cutting 

Raking, per acre, per cutting 

Shocking, per acre, per cutting 

Stacking, per ton : 

Baling, per ton 

Hauling to cars, if baled (5 miles) per ton. .... 
Taxes and insurance, per acre: 

Best land 

Good land 

Fair land 

Farm returns for product, baled and f.o.b. per ton: 
First cutting: 

High 

Low 

Usual 

Second, and subseouent cuttings: 

High 

■Low .- 

Usual 





$300 . 00 




200.00 


8300.00 


400.00 


200.00 


250.00 


125.00 


150.00 


30.00 


50.00 


5.00 


9.00 


3.00 


7.25 


0.40 


0.70 


0.45 


0.75 


1.00 


1.60 


0.40 


0.70 


3.00 


7.00 


10.00 


14.00 


1.50 


1.75 



1.00 

7.00 
8.00 
0.50 
0.20 
0.30 
0.60 
1.75 
1.50 

3.00 
2.00 
1.00 



10.00 
5.00 
8.00 

150.00 

6.00 

10.00 



1.75 



8 


00 


12 


00 





80 





35 





50 


1 


00 


4 


00 


2 


50 


3 


25 


2 


25 


1 


25 


16 


00 


8 


00 


12 


00 


28 


00 


12 


00 


18 


00 



Both usual and good yields are shown. Of 100 commercial growers 
from 30 to 50 will obtain usual yields, while 8 to 12 receive good yields. 
The rest receive either less than usual or more than good. 



428 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



A summary of the costs for the field crops follows. Fruit and truck 
crops are shown in subsequent sections set aside for such cost data.^^ 

Table 179. — Summary of Operating Costs in Producing California Field Crops 



Crop 



Usual yields 



Yield 
per acre 



Cost 

per 

acre, 

1915 



Cost 

per 

acre, 

1919 



Good yields 



Yield 
per acre 



Cost 

per 

acre, 

1915 



Cost 
per 
acre, 
1919 



Alfalfa 

Asparagus 

Barley 

Beans, dry 

Corn, Indian (grain) 

Cotton, medium staple, lint. . 

Hay, grain 

Hops 

Oats 

Peas, dry 

Potato. 

Rice 

Sorghum (grain) 

Sugar beets 

Wheat 

Average cost per acre 

Percentage increase in costs 
1919 over 1915 



5 tons 
4,000 1b. 
1,200 1b. 
1,000 1b. 
1,0001b. 

400 lb. 

1 ton 
1,400 1b. 

900 lb. 

800 lb. 
6,000 1b. 
2,500 1b. 
1,200 1b. 
10 tons 

700 lb. 



$39.00 
55.00 

8.00 
15.00 
18.00 
42.00 

8.00 
60.00 

7.00 
44.00 
42.00 
41.00 
18.00 
39.00 

7.00 



!$29.53 



I 53.00 
111.00 
13.00 
26.00 
32.00 
75.00 
16.00 
144.00 
14.00 
63.00 
78.00 
73.00 
22.00 
61.00 
12.00 



$ 52.87 



8 tons 


$65.00 


5,000 1b. 


65.00 


2,000 1b. 


10.00 


1,500 1b. 


19.00 


2,000 1b. 


23.00 


750 lb. 


60.00 


2 tons 


12.00 


2,000 1b. 


68.00 


1,500 1b. 


11.00 


1,200 1b. 


57.00 


15,000 1b. 


60.00 


3,500 1b. 


45.00 


2,500 1b. 


24.00 


15 tons 


42.00 


1,0001b. 


7.00 




$37.87 



\ 90.00 

132 . 00 
17.00 
31.00 
51.00 

109.00 
21.00 

185.00 
18.00 
87.00 

113.00 
82.00 
29.00 
66.00 
12.00 



$ 69.53 



80 per cent 



84 per cent 



These data are instructive in showing (a) the variation in expense 
of producing different crops, (6) the variation in receipts, (c) the sums 
available for uses other than operating expense, {d) the change in costs 
and receipts 1915 to 1919, (e) capital requirements. 

Values of these same crops are shown in the chapter on profits. 

Costs of Producing Fruit Crops 

Costs of Producing Apples: Washington, Colorado, Oregon, Idaho: 
1914-15. — -The cost of producing apples has been studied by the federal 
Office of Farm Management in various apple growing districts of the 
United States. The findings of these studies are now appearing, the 
first six publications being by S. M. Thomson and G. H. Miller, covering 
the following: 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 429 

Table 180. — Costs of Producing Apples (Five States) 



District 



U. S. D. A. 

Office of Farm 

Management, 

Bulletin 

number 



Date of issue 



Wenatchee Valley, Washington 

Western Colorado 

Hood River Valley, Oregon .... 
Yakima Valley, Washington . . . 

Payette Valley, Idaho 

Western New York 




Jan. 10, 1917 
Mar. 14, 1917 
Mar. 17, 1917 
Apr. 20, 1918 
May 10, 1918 
July 30, 1920 



The publications are unusually detailed in reporting sizes of orchards, 
kinds of operations, land values, labor requirements, material and 
fixed costs, and yields. In brief, the findings show the costs, for the year 
when the study was made, to be: 
Table 181. — -Summary of Apple Production Cost Data from Five States 





Year 
studied 


Number 
orchards 
studied 


Average 

yield 

packed 

boxes 


Total average cost 


District 


Per 

acre 


Per packed 
box 


Wenatchee Valley, Wash.... 
Western Colorado 


1914 

1914-15 

1915 

1915 

1915 

1914-16 


87 593.0 

125 284.0 


$469.73 
239 . 79 
226 . 96 
345 . 68 
239 . 65 
118.78 


$0.79 
0.84 


Hood River Valley, Ore 

Yakima Valley, Wash 

Payette Valley, Idaho 

Western New York 


54 
120 

38 
218 


222.0 

432.0 
337.0 
84.1 bbl. 


1.02 
0.80 
0.71 
1.41 per barrel 







Estimations of cost include: 



Labor 



Costs other than labor 



Maintenance 



Handling the crop 



Material costs 



Fixed costs 



Manuring 


Hauling box shooks 


Box shook 


Taxes 


Pruning 


Making boxes 


Nails 


Insurance 


Disposing of brush 


Picking 


Paper 


Water rent 


Plowing 


Hauling boxes to 


Labels 


Equipment charge 


Cultivating 


and from orchard 


Spray materials 


Machine hire 


Irrigating 


Sorting 


Manure 


Interest 


Thinning 


Packing 


Gasoline, oil, etc. 


Building charge 


Spraying 


Hauling packed 






Propping 


boxes 






Cover crops 


Picking up and 






Miscellaneous 


hauling culls 







430 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



A condensed table showing labor for an average acre of fruit in five 
commerical apple growing sections is obtainable from the data. To the 
unit factors of labor indicated here, must be added the money costs of 
materials and fixed charges, to obtain the total cost given above. Full 
details of these items can be obtained in the publications. 

Table 182. — Detailed Costs of Producing Apples — Data from Five States 



Item 



Wentachee 
Valley, 
Wash. 



Western 
Colorado 



Hood River 
Valley, Ore 



Yakima Val- 
ley, Wash. 



Payette Val- 
ley, Idaho 



Yields in boxes 



593 



284 



222 



432 



Maintenance 



Man- 
hours 



Horse- 
hours 



Man- 
hours 



Horse- 
hours 



Man- 
hours 



Horse- 
hours 



Man- 
hours 



Horse- 
jhours 



Man- 
hours 



Horse- 
hours 



Manuring 

Pruning 

Disposing of brush 

Cultivating and furrowing 

for irrigating 

Irrigating 

Thinning 

Spraying 

Propping 

Cover cropping 

Miscellaneous 

Total maintenance 

Handling the crops: 

Hauling shook 

Making boxes 

Picking 

Hauling to and from or- 
chard 

Packing house labor 

Hauling to ship 

Total handling 



Grand total of both main- 
tenance and handling. . . . 



4.32 
40.31 
11.86 

28.52 
34.37 
53.29 
28.12 
19.01 

9.06 



10 



31 



24.36 



13.60 
25.16 
24.63 
25.71 
14.23 



20.29 



2.84 



7.40 
52.55 
11.46 

26.67 
17.52 
49.39 
36.69 
4.06 

9.65 



13.00 
11.35 
45.83 



25.08 
3.69 



0.72 



3.78 
47.41 



23.92 

9.34 

47.36 

31.71 

6.00 

7.00 



228 . 86 

3.81 

17.80 

119.24 

17.95 

15.96 



102. 

7. 



142.19 
1.80 

* 

56.00 

7.05 

111.26 

11.73 



156.52 



76.59 



174.76 



403.62 



75,00 



191.33 



47.34 



187.84 



No 
total 
given 



No 

total 
given 



7.32 



47.84 



22.92 
8.15 



86.23 



' Reported in money. 



Indiana Apple Costs: 1911-12. — Costs for pruning, cultivation, 
fertilizing, spraying, and incidental work, studied during 1911 and 1912 
in eight districts of Indiana, ^^ gave for apple production a total average 
per acre of $56.68, with average yield of 234.4 bu. The average cost 
of handling the orchard was therefore at the rate of 44.7 ^ per bushel, to 
which must be added the sum of $34.61 cost of harvesting and packing, 
making a total cost of 57.7^ per bushel. Items do not include interest, 
depreciation, taxes, insurance, or risk. 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 431 

West Virginia Peach Costs: 1912. — Arnold, in reporting results of a 
study in West Virginia, figures the cost of an average acre of peaches 
brought to four years of age, that is bearing age, at $187.10 for smooth 
land, and $281.50 for "chert" land. The units of cost include man labor 
at $30.00 and perquisites for monthly men, and 12)^ to 15^ per hour for 
transient help; horse labor at 50 to 75^ per day; care of orchard and fruit, 
interest on investment and current expenses, taxes, depreciation of work 
stock, repairs, incidental expenses, and management. The total cash 
cost amounts to $52.23 per acre on smooth land and $61.29 on chert 
land. Estimating the yield at 130 baskets per acre, the cost per basket 
ranges from 40 to 47?^. 

Nebraska Spraying Costs: 1913-14^15. — Accurate accounts by the 
University of Nebraska were kept of all the labor and materials used in 
spraying apples throughout the three seasons of 1913-1914-1915. In 
computing costs of spraying, averages were made for each type of 
machine, for all Bordeaux schedules, for lime sulphur schedules, and for 
the mist and penetration schedules. In computing the cost of lime 
sulphur the 1,^-2-50 -formula was used, the cost of poison being included. 
In computing the cost of Bordeaux and arsenate of lead the 3-4-2-50 
formula was used. 

The cost was found to range from 24^ to 30^ per tree for four spray- 
ings, or a general total average of 27^ per tree, or 7^ per spray. 5 gallons 
of spray per tree per time was required. The 7^ cost was divided thus: 

38 per cent for Man labor 
14 per cent for Horse labor 
28 per cent for Fungicide 
20 per cent for Insecticide 

Costs of California Fruits: 1915 and 1919.— Certain selected Cali- 
fornia fruit crops under conditions as outlined for California field crops 
(page 426) were found for usual and good crops, to be:" 



432 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 183. — Per Acre Operating Costs of Producing Fruit in California 



Crop 



Usual yields 



Yield per acre 



Cost 

per acre 

1915 



Cost 

per acre 

1919 



Good yields 



Yield per acre 



Cost 

per acre 

1915 



Cost 

per acre 

1919 



Almond. 
Apple. . . 



Apricot 

Cherry 

Fig 

Grape (raisin). 

Grape (table). 
Lemon 



Olive. . 
Orange. 



Peach . . 
Pear. . . . 
Plum. . . 
Prune. . 
Walnut. 



Average cost per 
acre 

Percentage in- 
crease in acreage 
costs 1919 over 
1915 



700 lb. 

150 packed 
boxes 
4 tons 
2 tons 
2 tons 

1 ton dried 
product 

4 tons 

150 packed 

boxes 
13^ tons 
125 packed 

boxes 
6 tons 

5 tons 
3}4 tons 

2 tons 
}4 ton 



; 52.00 
120.00 

89.00 

118.00 

48.00 

41.00 

41.00 
264 . 00 

62.00 
178.00 

70.00 
81.00 
130.00 
81.00 
79.00 



; 72.00 
217.00 

173.00 

252 . 00 

85.00 

75.00 

69.00 
346.00 

123.00 
230.00 

124.00 
143 . 00 
206.00 
139.00 
95.00 



$ 96.93 $156.60 



60 per cent 



1,200 1b. 

400 packed 

boxes 
8 tons 
4 tons 
23-^ tons 
1}4 tons dried 

product 

7 tons 

300 packed 
boxes 

2 tons 

250 p a c k ed 
boxes 

8 tons 
10 tons 
6 tons 

3 tons 
y4, ton 



i 84.00 
188.00 

119.00 

210.00 

55.00 

52.00 

55.00 
467 . 00 

74.00 
250.00 

78.00 
101 . 00 
196 . 00 

97.00 
105.00 



$116.00 
365.00 

214.00 

464 . 00 

99.00 

90.00 

93.00 
542.00 

150.00 
325 . 00 

136.00 
181.00 
312.00 
172 . 00 
123 . 00 



$142.07 $225.47 



59 per cent 



Crop values of these same crops are shown in chapter on profits. 

California Citrus Costs: 1913-14-15-16.— Levi Chubbuck of the 
U. S. D. A. (Office of Farm Management) from figures of cost from 
California citrus groves, collected during 1913-14, 1914-15, 1915-16, 
1916-17, and grouped according to the cultural and fertilizer costs, found: 



COSTS OF PRODUCING CROPS 



433 



Table 184. — California Citrus Costs 

Details of Cultural Costs — (to nearest dollar, hence totals rriay not check with details) 

Groups of 10 farms each 





Aver- 


Yield 


Cul- 


















Gross 


Group 


age 


boxes 


tural 


Culti- 


Irriga- 




Prun- 


gation 


Other 




Fertil- 


net 


No. 


num- 




cost 






Water 






tree 


Taxes 








per 




vation 


tion 




ing 


and 












ber 


acre 


per 










spray 


COots 




crop 


at $1.13 




acres 




acre 


















per box 


1 


16. 1 


147 


$ 52 


$15 


$ 5 


$ 6 


$ 3 


$ 2 


$ 5 


$ 8 


$ 8 


$166 


2 


14.7 


160 


71 


15 


5 


10 


5 


7 


5 


10 


14 


181 


3 


15.8 


150 


86 


19 


7 


10 


7 


5 


5 


9 


22 


170 


4 


17.6 


185 


99 


19 


7 


11 


5 


11 


5 


12 


29 


209 


5 


12.8 


204 


110 


10 


6 


12 


7 


15 


8 


12 


29 


230 


6 


12.3 


201 


124 


23 


7 


14 


8 


11 


8 


14 


40 


227 


7 


18.0 


244 


139 


24 


9 


13 


7 


12 


17 


14 


43 


275 


8 


13. 1 


351 


159 


24 


10 


16 


10 


19 


17 


17 


47 


396 


9 


12.7 


307 


183 


32 


11 


17 


11 


16 


25 


17 


48 


347 


10 


18.7 


345 


231 


34 


16 


23 


13 


30 


41 


21 


52 


390 


Average 


15.2 


229 


$125 


S22 


$ 8 


813 


S 8 


$13 


$13 


$13 


$33 


$259 


for 10 


























groups 



























Costs of Producing Vegetables and Truck Crops 

California Vegetable Costs. — In a set of five circulars by Rogers, ^""-^"^ 
the cost in California of producing tomatoes, lettuce, cabbage, onions, 
and spinach is shown to be: 

Table 185. — California Vegetables Costs 



Crop 


Yield 


Average cost 
per acre 


Year 


Cabbage 


12 tons 

10 to 12 tons 

2,000 dozens 

4 tons 

10 to 15 tons 


$77.65 
32 to 40 
73.20 
25 to 35 
84 


1915 


Tomatoes 

Lettuce 

Spinach 

Onions 


1916 
1917 
1918 
1919 



Summarized findings for certain California crops, collected as de- 
scribed under costs of California field crops (page 426), were found to 
be for usual and good yields: 



28 



434 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 186. — Operating Costs per Acre of Vegetables — California 





Usual yield 


Good yield 


Crop 


Yield 
per acre 


Cost per 
acre 
1915 


Cost per 
acre 
1919 


Yield 
per acre 


Cost per 
acre 
1915 


Cost per 
acre 
1919 




10 tons 
7>2 tons 
3 tons 
10 tons 


$ 93.00 
106.00 
48.00 
111.00 


$140.00 

206 . 00 

91.00 

167.00 


15 tons 

15 tons 

6 tons 

20 tons 


$106 

142 

63 

209 


$159.00 




280.00 




121.00 




310.00 










f 89.50 


$150.80 




$130 
67 per cent 


$217.60 


Percentage increase in acreage 
costs 1919 over 1915 




68 per cent 









Values for these same crops are shown in chapter on profits. 

Utah Tomato Costs. — The cost of producing an acre of tomatoes 
averaged for three Utah irrigated farms was found to be $98. 13^° divided 
among: 

Horse and man labor $61 . 02 

Manure . 93 

Plants 10.18 

Crates 1-95 

Water 3.26 

Interest and taxes 16 . 88 

Equipment 3 . 91 



CHAPTER XIX 

COSTS OF PRODUCING LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS : 
MISCELLANEOUS COSTS 



Costs of Producing Live Stock^"* 

Method of Figuring Costs of Producing Beef.^"^ — An example of 
the way stock men figure the cost of producing, or raising, a calf is shown 
in the following table takenfrom data collected during the years 1913-1917 
inclusive. 

Table 187. — Method of Determining Costs of Calves and Beef 

Calves. — Cost of keeping 100 cows (valued at $55 a head) a year: 

Interest 6 per cent $440 . 00 

Death loss estimated, at 3 per cent, 165.00 

Pasture (rental rate or 8 per cent on valuation) 726 . 28 

Feed (cost delivered) 381 . 59 

Labor (wages, board, bunkhouse, etc.) 122 . 74 

Ranch expenses (interest and depreciation of equipment, cattle associ- 
ation dues, killing prairie dogs) 278 . 43 

Administration (manager and offices) 71 .49 

Bull service (7,1 bulls valued at $90) 

Interest -$51 . 12 

Death loss estimated, at 3 per cent 19. 17 

Feed and pasture 78 . 66 

Labor and other expenses 33 . 56 

182.51 



$2,368.04 



Calf drop 46.3 per cent on foot at 8 months of age. 

Cost of calf at weaning time $51 . 15 

Steers. — Cost of producing a 20-months-old steer: 

Cost of 100 calves at $51.15 $5115.00 

Cost of keeping: 

Interest at 8 per cent 409 . 20 

Death loss 4 per cent 204 . 60 

Pasture 726 . 28 

Feed 381.59 

Labor 122.74 

Ranch expenses 278 . 43 

Administration 71 . 49 

Cost of steers at 20 months $7,309.33 

Cost of marketing 400 . 00 



Total marketed $7,709.33 

Cost per steer 77 . 09 

435 



436 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Cost of Prod ncing a Z-y ear-old Steer: 

Cost of 100 20-month-old steers at $73.09 

Cost for one year — 

Interest, loss, feed, pasture, labor and other expenses. Same as 
above 



Cost of 100 steers at 32 months. 
Marketing expenses 



$7,309.00 



2,457.61 

S9,766.94 
400.00 



Cost of 100, 32-month-old steers $10, 166.94 

Cost per steer $101 . 67 

Costs of Producing Beef. Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas: 1914- 
15-16. — Studies into the cost of raising a beef calf to weaning time 
(6-8 months) made in Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, and Kansas resulted 
in averages as follows: 

Table 188. — Cost of Beef Calves — Data from Four States 



Year 


Cow charge 


Bull charge 


Incidental 


Total 


1916 
1915 
1914 


$32.64 
34.81 
36.09 


$2.21 
2.19 
2.25 


$0.02 
0.01 
0.00 


$34.87 
37.01 
38.42 


3 years average 


$34.47 


$2.25 


$0.01 


$36.73 



The cost of producing a yearling from weaning time to 12 months — for 
the same studies shown in the previous table was found to be : 



Table 189. 


—Cost 


OF Producing Beef Yearlings — Data from 


Four 


States 




















Other 




















charges, 


Year 




Num- 
ber 
of farms 


Num- 
ber 
calves 


Cost at 

weaning 

time 


Feed 


Labor 


Equip- 
ment 


Interest 


risk, in- 
surance, 
taxes, 
veteri- 
nary 


1916 




106 


2,595 


$34.43 


$ 9.87 


$2.03 


$0.83 


$1.18 


$0.52 


1915 




99 


2,721 


37.09 


11.98 


2.18 


0.73 


1.33 


. 0.42 


1914 


age for 


91 


1,920 


39.41 


12.68 


2.21 


0.62 


1.40 


0.35 


Total and ?iver 






















296 


7,236 


$36.85 


$11.44 


$2.13 


$0.73 


$1.30 


$0.44 







Year 



Gross cost Manure credit 



Net cost 



1916 
1915 
1914 



Average. 



$48.86 
53.73 
56.67 

$52.89 



$1.58 
1.61 
1.59 

$1.60 



$47.28 
52.12 
55.08 

$51.29 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



437 



Costs of Producing Beef: Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, 
South Dakota, Nebraska and Kansas: 1914. — The following from 900 
records referring to 23,258 cows, taken in Illino s, Indiana, Minnesota, 
Iowa, Missouri, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas, show an 85 per cent 
calf drop, which, when based on beef raising, cost: 

Table 190. — Costs of Producing Beef, Calves, and Yearlings — Data From 

Eight States 

Gross cost of maintaining cow, average $35 . 00 

Less credit for manure and milk, net cost 30 . 00 

Bull charge 2 . 25 

Cost of raising a yearling. Average 296 farms. 

Cost at weaning time 36 . 85 

Winter feed 1 1 . 44 

Other charges 4 . 60 



Gross cost $52 . 89 

Credits 1 . 60 



Net cost $51 . 29 

Costs of Producing Beef: Oklahoma and Texas: 1913-1917. — Summary 
of eight western ranches in Oklahoma and Texas from cost data taken 
from ranch books for the years 1913-1917, show the average cost to range 
as follows: 

Table 191. — Costs of Producing Beef, Calves, Yearlings, Twos and Threes 

(Oklahoma and Texas) 



For period 


Ranches 


Average cost 


Cost of calf to weaning time (8 months) 


2 


$35 00 






38.00 






44.00 






46.00 






47.00 






48.00 






61.00 


20-month-old steer 




52 00 




55.00 






57.00 






63.00 






66.00 






77.00 


32-month-old steer 




68 00 




74.00 


3-year-old steer 




77 00 






85.00 






89.00 






102.00 



438 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Cost of Fattening Beef. Cost of Fattening Beef, Illinois: 1912-1917. — 
From a 5-year study of fattening costs in Illinois, covering the year 
1912-1917, the range and average cost were determined. The table 
shows the analysis of average costs covering the entire 5 years. 



Table 192. — Illinois Costs of Fattening Beef 



Years, 1912-1917 


Range 


Average 


Purchase weight, pounds 


923-1 , 146 

1,212-1,327 

105- 204 

1.31- 1.72 


1,027 


Sales weight pounds 


1,226 


Days on feed 


151 


Average gain, pounds 


1.6 







Costs 



Range 



Average 



Cost laid down 

Feed 

Labor 

Equipment 

Interest 

Risk 

General farm expense 

Marketing 

Gross cost 

Credits — pork and manure 

Net cost 

Sales price 

Profit 

Margin 

Necessary margin 



$56.89-$ 86.44 



32.43- 


50.31 


2.18- 


3.90 


0.16- 


0.42 


1.24- 


3.11 


0.31- 


1.31 


0.87- 


1.62 


1.70- 


3.09 


110.22- 


131.82 


7.27- 


14.48 


100.82- 


121.22 


102.49- 


135.01 


-8.19 


+ 16.40 



$ 71.69 

40.60 

3.04 

0.27 

2.32 

0.62 

1.36 

2.06 

122 . 46 

10.79 

111.67 

115.21 

3.54 

2.16 

1.87 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



439 



Costs of Fattening Beef: Missouri, Kansas and Nebraska: 1913-1916. — • 
Twenty farm records taken from Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska during 
the years 1913-1917, resulted in costs as shown in the following table: 

Table 193. — Costs of Fattening Beef — Missouri, Kansas, and Nebraska 





Missouri 


Kansas 


Nebraska 


Cost laid down 


$56.39 
28.15 
1.91 
0.84 
1.60 
0.16 

0.56 
3.39 


$72.04 
42.56 
1.60 
2.90 
2.93 
0.13 

0.72 

2.83 


$68.19 


Feed 


38 04 


Labor 


2.04 


Equipment 


2.24 


Interest 


2 01 


Risk 


0.25 


General farm expense veterinary, insur- 
ance, tax, administration. 


0.68 


Marketing 


3.14 






Gross cost 


$93.14 
4.26 


$126.16 
4.93 


$119.85 


Credits 


7.50 






Net cost 


$88.88 
83 . 97 


$121.23 
127.81 


$112.35 


Sales price 


110.52 






Profit 




$6.58 




Loss 


$4.91 


$1.83 







Summary of Costs of Producing Beef. — By bringing together and 
analyzing the various costs entering into the fattening of cattle, the 
distribution and percentages, the following results are found to hold for 
selected localities: 



440 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Table 194. — Summarized Costs of Fattening Beef 



Cost items 



1,122 

calves 

in corn 

belt 



1,551 
year- 
lings, 
Nebras- 
ka; Iowa 

and 
Missouri 



2-year- 
old 
cattle, 
Nebras- 
ka, Iowa 

and 
Missouri 



3-year- 
old 
cattle 
Illinois 



3-year- 
old 
cattle, 

Nebras- 
ka, Kan- 
sas and 
Missouri 



Purchase, per cent 

Feed, per cent 

Labor, per cent 

Interest, per cent 

Equipment, per cent 

Marketing, per cent 

Risk, per cent 

Miscellaneous, veterinary, insurance, 
taxes, per cent : 

Value of credits (manure and pork) 
equal on total gross cost, per cent . 

Initial weight 

Average number of days fed 

Average gain per head per day 



38 
51 
3 
3 
2 
2 



43 
47 
3 
2 
2 
2 



51 
40 
2 
2 
2 
2 



59.0 
33.0 
2.5 
2.0 
0.2 
2.0 
0.5 

0.8 



58.0 
33.0 
1.7 
2.0 
2.0 
2.6 
0.1 

0.6 



10 



9 



452 
212 
1.6 



691 
218 
1.6 



938 
184 
1.6 



1027 
151 
1.6 



Cost of Producing Hogs. Cost of Producing Hogs: Nebraska, Mis- 
souri, Wisconsin, Iowa: 1918. — A study by the survey method of 231 
farms in Nebraska, Minnesota, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Iowa to note 
the cost of producing hogs in 1918, resulted in findings, based on 100 lb. 
of pork, that the feed cost including pasturage averaged 85 per cent of 
the cost of production, ranging from 80 to 89 per cent. Pasture and 
forage crops were found to equal 2.1 to 7.8 per cent of the feed cost or 
a general average of 5 per cent. The feed was mostly corn helped out 
by mill feeds, oil cake, tankage, skimmed milk, plus pasture of blue 
grass, clover, alfalfa or oats, and peas. 

The bedding charge ranged from 3 to 12^ per 100 lb. of hog, with an 
average of Qli^. The charge of hog lot, fences, shelter, and other equip- 
ment totaled 2.3 per cent. 

Labor per 100 lb. of pork amounted to: 





Range 


Average 


J 

Amount of man-hours 


2%-6M 


4 


Amount of horse-hours 


H 






Per cent labor to cost or production 


4.8-12.7 


7H 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 441 

Cost of Producing Hogs: Georgia: 1915 and 1917. — Haskell'*^ from a 
study of pork production collected during a farm management survey 
of Brooks County, Georgia, and later by personal visits to 218 farms in 
southwestern Georgia, found the total feed cost to be 79.6 per cent of the 
gross cost of production, or 84.5 per cent of the net cost after deducting 
the value of the manure. Man labor amounted l^o 8.8 per cent, mule 
labor 1.1 per cent, interest 4.1 per cent, buildings and equipment 3.4 per 
cent, veterinary and serum 1.9 per cent, dips, minerals, and medicine 1 
per cent, taxes on hogs 0.1 per cent. The credits to be deducted (manure 
credit and a very few receipts from breeding fees) amounted to 5.9 per 
cent of the gross cost. On the average farm 55.4 days of man labor and 
7.8 days of mule labor were spent on the hogs. This amounted to 
slightly less than one-half of a man per day for every 100 lb. of live stock 
grown. The item of interest totaled to somewhat less than half as 
much as the labor charge. It consisted principally of the interest (at 
8 per cent) on the value of the stock hogs carried over from one year to 
the next, but included also the proportional share of the interest on the 
cash to run the farm business. This is a considerable item and one often 
overlooked. 

The annual cost of buildings and equipment was a little less than the 
interest charge, or $25.85 per farm. This includes the depreciation, 
repairs, and interest on the investment in fences, hog houses, shelters, 
watering systems, dipping vats, troughs, and other miscellaneous equip- 
ment, or the share of these that was properly chargeable to the hogs. 
The climate here is so mild that but few, simple, and inexpensive buildings 
are required. Much the greater part of this charge is due to fences. 
Most of the farms are fenced with high woven wire or woven wire and 
one or two barbed wires. These fences, at pre-war prices,, cost from 
$150 to $175 per mile to build new. The annual charge to cover interest, 
repairs, and depreciation of wire and posts on this type of fence amounts 
to about 15 per cent of the value. The hogs were charged with only the 
amount of the fence maintained in addition to that which would have been 
needed if hogs had not been kept. On most of the farms this amounted to 
from one-fourth to one-half of the total farm fence, or an average of 
about 1 mile of fence per farm. 

The payments for veterinary services and anti-hog cholera serum 
averaged $14.26 per farm, or about 2 per cent of the cost, of production. 
The serum accounted for nearly all of this item. Many of the farmers, 
however, did not use serum, hence their average cost was only about one- 
half as large as the cost where it was used. Under normal conditions, 
about 30^ per hog or pig will be found a minimum allowance to cover 
the cash outlay when the farmer does the inoculating himself. When it 
is considered how large and widespread the losses from cholera have been 
each year, the cost of inoculation will be found to be cheap insurance 



442 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



against such losses. Dips, minerals, medicines, and tonics amounted to 
about half as much as the serum cost. The largest items under this 
heading were crude oil applied to kill lice; and copperas, charcoal, and 
salt used as tonics. Taxes on hogs and cash expense for breeding fees 
together amounted to less than $1 per farm. 

The actual cost of the pork per 100 lb. live weight grouped: 



Number of Sows Kept 



Cost per Hundredweight 



Three or less $5 . 93 

Eight or nine 5 . 66 

Thirteen to twenty 5 . 89 

More than twenty 6 . 27 

Data from 55 Brooks County, Georgia farms raising hogs indicated 
cost as follows^" for 1914: 

Table 195. — Cost of Swine Production (Brooks County, Georgia) 



Cost per 
farm 



Cost per 
100 lb. 

live 
weight 



Per cent 

of gross 

cost 



Total pasture cost* 

Corn (173 bu.) 

Watermelons, fed 

Total feed cost 

Man labor (41 days) 

Mule labor (5.1 days) 

Equipment 

Veterinary, serum, dips, medicine 

Interest 

Taxes 

Gross cost 

Manure credit 

Net cost 

Net cost on 45 farms with no losses from cholera 



375.65 

129.40 

8.43 



513.48 
58.60 
5.02 
1.13 
5.50 
19.62 
0.82 



604.17 
40.85 



$563.32 



$3.40 
1.17 
0.08 



4.65 
0.53 
0.05 
0.01 
0.05 
0.18 
0.01 



$5.48 
0.37 



55.11 
4.73 



162.2 

21.4 

1.4 



85.0 
9.7 
0.8 
0.2 
0.9 
3.3 
0.1 



100.0 
6.8 



* Charged at cost of production. 

It will be seen by the table that of the gross cost of producing hogs, 
one-half is accounted for by the cost of peanuts pastured, two-thirds 
by all crops pastured, and 85 per cent by all classes of feeds. The 
peanuts, oats, rye, and sweet potatoes fed were all pasture crops of pro- 
duction. All other pasture is entered at the estimated renting value. 
Corn is charged at the farm price. 

Costs of Raising Dairy Heifers. Ohio. — Ohio has reported'''*' the costs 
of various factors entering into the raising of dairy calves. Rates are 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



443 



here given so that readjustments may be made with local or more recent 
figures. 

Table 196. — Costs of Raising Dairy Heifers — Ohio 



Items 



First year 

(.calf to 

yearling) 



Second 

year 
(yearling 
to 2 year 

old) 



Total 



Value at birth 

Cost of labor at 15 ^ per hour 

Bedding, fiat charge 

Service fees, based on bull cost of $50 for 30 to 35 
cows 

Tools, veterinary, flat charge 

Housing, flat rate 

Interest and taxes at 6 per cent 

Feeds per hundredweight 

Whole milk $1.50 

Skim milk 0.20 

Concentrates 

Average 1 . 25 

Hay, average 14 . 00 per ton 

Corn silage 4 . 00 per ton 

Pasture. . .30(f per month, first year 
90 ^ per month, second year 

Total feed cost _. 

Total cost 

Credit by manure 

Net cost 



$5.00 
6.50 
2.00 



00 
00 



28.53 



$46 . 32 
3.00 



$43.32 



$5.00 
2.50 

1.50 
0.50 
2.00 



28.34 



$43.23 
6.00 



$37.23 



$4.50 



1.50 
4.00 



56.87 



$89.55 
9.00 



$80.55 



Costs of Raising Pullets, hidiana: 1916-17. — A Purdue University 
bulletin 1"^ reports the cost of the items involved in producing and rearing 
White Plymouth Rock broilers, roosters, capons, and pullets, based on 
1916 and 1917 data to be: 

„ , ., ^ „ , , , / 4.8 to 5.6 lb. grain 

2-lb. broiler, 9-10 weeks old \ 6.5 to 8.5 lb. skim milk 

^_„ , , / 24 to 27 lb. of feed 

6.H-lb. rooster, 24 weeks ^ 22 lb. skim milk 

^ „ „„ , / 27 to 30 lb. of feed 

Pullet, 28 weeks \ 22 to 37 lb. skim milk 

^w ,,. ,, , / 64 to 67 lb. feed 

63^-lb. capon, 41 weeks | 62 to 79 lb. skim milk 



444 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Total cost of hatching one chick averaged 6.8^ on basis of 50 per cent 
hatch, and eggs at 2 and 2.5(;S each. 

With prices prevailing at the time the net and gross cost in dollars 
per pullet amounted to: 

1916 1917 

Gross cost per pullet $1.15 $1 . 39 

Net cost per pullet raised . 43 . 70 

California {Average Figures). — Tables of financial items collected 
under conditions of 1915 (pre-war) and 1919 (post-war) provide a basis 
for computing costs of production under California conditions. 
Table 197. — Cost Data op Poultry Business — California 



Rates as of 



1915 (pre- 
war) 



Market price for lands suitable for poultry, per acre (not 
including fences, buildings nor improvements) 

In poultry centers 

Near large towns 

Back country 

Cost of stocking (white leghorns) 

Day -old chicks 

3-month-old pullets 

Mature fowls 

Labor costs, per month, wages . 

and found 

Per fowl, per month 

Laying, 10 months 

Moulting, 2 months 

Per chick, for period 

First 3 months 

Second 3 months 

Feeding costs 

Per fowl, per rnonth 

Laying 

Moulting. 

Feeding costs 

Per chick, per month 

■ First month 

Second month 

Third month 

Fourth month 

Fifth month 

Total for period 

Farm returns for products 

Eggs, per dozen, extras* 

Young fowls, per pound 

Aged fowls, per pound 

* 80 per cent of output. 



$600.00 
600.00 
250.00 

0.08 

0.60 

1.00 

30.00 

18.00 

• 0.063^ 
0.05 

0.08 
0.12 



0.12 
0.10 



0.03 
0.05 
0.07 
0.08 
0.09 

$ 0.32 

0.31 
0.18 
0.12 



1919 (post- 
war) 



$700.00 
700.00 
250.00 

0.12 

1.25 

2.00 

60.00 

30.00 

0.10 
0.071^ 

0.12 
0.18 



0.20 
0.17 



0.05 
0.08 
0.11 
0.14 
0.17 

$ 0.55 

0.55 
0.39 
0.35 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



445 



Costs of Fattening Lambs. — Costs of feeding lambs are subject to 
wide variations. A study during 1916 and 1917, of 82 bunches fattened 
in open yards in Colorado and Nebraska, showed a distribution of cost 
percentages. These are further amplified with data from Missouri, 
Michigan, Indiana, and New York. 

Table 198. — Costs of Fattening Lambs — Sex States 



Cost item 



Open yards, Field fat- 
Colorado and tening, Mis- 
Nebraska, I souri, 1917- 
1916-17 18 



Barn fatten- 
ing, Michi- 
gan and Indi- 
ana, 1916-18 



Barn fatten- 
ing. New 
York, 1917- 
18 



Initial cost 

Feed 

Labor 

Equipment 

Interest 

Risk 

Miscellaneous (veterinary, 
insurance, taxes, inciden- 
tals) 

Marketing 



52% 
34 

4 

1 

2 

1 



73% 

20 
0.5 
0.3 
1.5 
2.3 



0.2 
2.2 



57 
31 

3 

3.7 

1.8 

1 



0.5 
2 



65 
26.5 

1.5 

3 

1.3 

2.5 



0.2 





Gross cost in dollars 


$9.59 


$15.09 


$14.27 


$16.17 


$7.01 




Giving a gross cost of which credits 
(wool and manure) amount to, per 
cent 


1 


1.8 


4.6 


2.3 


1 3 






Initial weight 


55-60 


63>^ 


61M 


59 


60 


Days fed 


5K-6 
months 


92 days 


119 days 


138 days 


101 days 




Average pounds monthly gain 


10 


6.6 


6.0 


6.7 


5.9 



California Cost Data: Beef, Sheep and Swine. — Tables of financial 
items collected under conditions of 1915 (pre-war) and 1919 (post-war), 
provide a basis for computing costs of handling stock under California 
conditions. 



446 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Financial Items of California Beef Business (Average Figures). — 
Table 199. — Cost Data of Beef Business — California 



Rates as 



1915 
(pre-war) 



1919 

(post-war) 



Market prices for land, per acre (fenced but not including 
buildings) 

Valley range 

Hill range 

Costs of stocking (usual quality) 

Grade cows 

Pure bred cows 

Pure bred bulls 

Yearlings 

Twos 

Labor costs 

Range riders, per month, wages 

and found 

Fence crews per day 

Wages 

and found 

Feed costs 

Alfalfa hay, in stack, per ton 

Barley, per hundredweight 

Egyptian corn, per hundredweight 

Barley stubble, per acre. ' ' 

Wheat stubble, per acre' 

Farm returns for product 
Fat beef, per pound 

Steers 

Heifers 

Old cows, per pound 

Hides No. 1-30-60 lb. (per pound) 

No. 2-30-60 lb 

Wet salted, kips 15-30 lb 

Wet salted, calf 5-15 lb 

Dry 16 lb. up 



30.00 


$ 40.00 


8.00 


10.00 


60.00 


85.00 


125.00 


200.00 


250.00 


250.00 


25.00 


45.00 


50.00 


70.00 


40.00 


70.00 


15.00 


30.00 


1.50 


2.50 


.50 


1.00 


8.00 


16.00 


1.10 


2.50 


1.30 


3.00 


.25 


1.00 


.20 


.75 


0.07 


0.10 


0.06 


0.09 


0.04 


0.05 


0.16 


0.34 


0.15 


0.30 


0.16 


0.38 


0.16 


0.60 


0.26 


0.45 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



447 



Financial Items of California Sheep Business (Average Figures). — 
Table 200. — Cost Data of Sheep Business— California 



Rates as of 



1915 
(pre-war) 



1919 

(war) 



Land values 

Fenced range, price per acre 

If leased, per year 

If purchased 

Unimproved 

Improved 

Costs of stocking 

Registered bucks 

Grade bucks 

Registered ewes 

Grade ewes 

Herding costs 
Open range 

One man to 1,000 sheep 

Wages, per month 

Found 

Extra help, lambing time 

Wages, per day 

Found 

Fenced range 

General ranch help 

Wages, per month 

Found 

Shearing costs, per time 

Ewes, once a year 

Ewes, twice a year, per time 

Lambs 

Bucks 

Wool sacks, each 

Twine, per sack 

■Farm returns for product 
Wool 

Lamb, grease wool 

Sheep, grease wool 

Meat 

Lamb 

Wethers 

Aged ewes 

Ewes, medium, good and choice 



$ 2.00 



12.00 


14.00 


15.00 


20.00 


50.00 


100.00 


15.00 


25.00 


20.00 


30.00 


6.00 


12.00 



$2.00 



40.00 


85.00 


12.00 


20.00 


2.00 


3.50 


0.50 


1.00 


35.00 


60.00 


15.00 


30.00 


0.10 


0.20 


0.07 


0.15 


0.07 


0.10 


0.10 


0.20 


0.14 


1.00 


0.03 


0.05 


0.10 


0.40 


0.16 


0.60 




0.12 




0.10 




0.06 




0.08 



448 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Financial Items of California Swine Business (Average Figures). — 
Table 201. — Cost Data of Swine Business — California 



Rates as of 



1915 
(pre-war) 



1919 
(war) 



Market prices for land, per acre 

Same as for alfalfa or grain 
Costs of stocking (usual quality) 

Grade sows 

Pure bred sows 

Pure bred boars, mature 

Grade gilts 

Pure bred gilts 

Labor costs 

Hogmen, per month, wages 

and found 

Fence builders, per day 

wages 

found 

Feed costs per ton 

Rolled barley 

Bran 

Dried beet pulp 

Middlings 

Shorts 

Alfalfa meal 

Alfalfa hay 

Mill run 

Pumpkins, per ton 

Farm returns for products 
Fat hogs per pound 

Best 

Good 

Fair 

Feeders average 1 to 3ff less than fat prices 



20.00 


$ 40.00 


30.00 


100.00 


75.00 


150.00 


18.00 


40.00 


25.00 


100.00 


60.00 


100.00 


18.00 


30.00 


1.10 


2.50 


0.50 


1.00 


28.00 


56.00 


30.00 


42.00 


26.00 


46.00 


40.00 


48.00 


32.00 


45.00 


16.00 


32.00 


10.00 


18.00 


26.00 


42.00 


4.00 


5.00 


0.07 


0.16 


0.061^ 


0.15 


0.06 


0.14 



Cost Data of California Dairying Business (Average Figures). — 
Tables of financial items collected under conditions of 1915 (pre-war) and 
1919 (post-war) provide a basis for computing costs of production under 
California conditions. 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 449 

Table 202. — Cost Data of Dairy Business — California 



Rates as of 



1915 
(pre-war) 



1919 
(war) 



Market prices for land, per acre 
(no buildings or fences) 

Alfalfa, pasture or hay 

Level wildgrass pasture 

Hill wildgrass pasture 

Costs of stocking (usual quality) 

Grade cows 

Pure bred cows 

Pure bred bulls 

Yearlings 

Twos 

Labor costs 

Milkers, per month 

found 

Hay hands and feeders, per day 

found 

Feed costs, per ton 

Rolled barley 

Bran 

Dried beet pulp •. 

Middlings 

Shorts 

Alfalfa meal 

Alfalfa hay 

Mill run 

Farm returns for product 
Milk 

Southern California per 100 lb 

Northern California per gallon 

Butterfat 

Southern California 

Northern California 

Meat 

Newborn calves 

3-week calves 

2-4-month calves 

Old cows, 50 per cent of beef prices 

Skim milk 

5 lb. equivalent to 1 lb. of grain, hence per 
hundredweight 



200.00 


$250.00 


100.00 


125.00 


20.00 


25.00 


85.00 


120.00 


110.00 


175.00 


250.00 


250.00 


40.00 


60.00 


60.00 


80.00 


50.00 


100.00 


18.00 


30.00 


2.00 


3.00 


0.50 


1.00 


28.00 


56.00 


30.00 


42.00 


26.00 


46.00 


40.00 


48.00 


32.00 


45.00 


16.00 


32.00 


10.00 


18.00 


26.00 


42.00 


2.10 


4.12 


0.16 


0.28 


0.38 


0.59 


0.31 


0.65 


5.00 


10.00 


10.00 


15.00 


15.00 


20.00 


35.00 


50.00 



0.20 



0.50 



29 



450 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Costs of Producing Milk. Milk Production Costs: Michigan: 1914- 
1915. — The Michigan Agricultural College in Bulletin 227 by A. C. Ander- 
son and F. T. Riddell, issued Dec, 1916, reports the net cost of producing 
milk on 29 farms studied by cost accounting methods in 1914 and 1915, 
to be 15.9^ and 15.39?^ per gallon, respectively, with prevailing rates of 
the period for labor, feed, and material to cover man and horse labor; 
feed; cash sundries; veterinary services and drugs; taxes, interest, and de- 
preciation of herd ; taxes, insurance, interest, repairs, and depreciation on 
buildings ; depreciation on equipment ; risk of business ; cost of sire. From 
these items of expense were credited milk, manure, and calves. 

Michigan found that labor constituted 30 per cent of the expense, 
feed 45 per cent and other charges 25 per cent, giving a total gross cost 
of keeping close to $150 per cow per year for an average of over 400 cows 
in the 29 dairies, and yielding an average of 6,928 lb. of milk in 1914 and 
7,156 in 1915, studied for from 4 to 7 years by cost accounting methods. 

Average yearly food requirements per cow were found to be: 

Succulents (mostly silage) 7,729 lb. 

Dry roughage, including bedding 3,321 

Grain (provided but amount not stated) 

Pasture (provided but amount not stated) 

In a later report, Michigan, giving the cost of milk production of 50 
herds, totaling 1,970 cows, studied for 2 and 3 years, outlines the items 
entering into the cost, and shows the unit expenses. ^"^ These were sum- 
marized into: 

Table 203. — Detailed Costs of Producing Milk Per 100 Pounds — Michigan 



Seasons 



Winter 
period 



Summer 
period 



Yearly 



Home grown grains, pounds 

Commercial feeds, pounds 

Hay, pounds 

Other dry roughage, pounds 

Silage, pounds 

Soiling crops and other succulent feeds, pounds 

Pasture, days, 

Bedding, pounds 

Labor performed by owner or operator, hours. . 

Labor performed by hired help, hours 

Horse labor, hours 

Hauling milk, cost per hundredweight: 
Corrective factor* 



12.1 


4.0 


16.5 


6.8 


49.2 


10.5 


21.4 


2.5 


147.2 


21.1 


3.5 


9.6 




6.9 


17.9 


2.9 


1.01 


0.96 


0.99 


1.00 


0.11 


0.05 


0.2183 


0.4499 



9.4 

13.3 

36.3 

15.1 

105.1 

5.5 

2.4 
12.9 

0.99 

1.00 

0.09 

0.2750 



* The overhead costs are determined by multiplying the value of all other items 
by the connective factor. 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



451 



Milk Production Costs: Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, NorthCaro- 
lina: 1908-1914. — A study into the net cost of producing milk on four 
dairy farms located in different states reported^* by the authors, 
reads : 



Average annual 
pounds of milk 
produced per cow 



Wisconsin 

Michigan 

Pennsylvania. . 
North Carolina 




5,240 
6,284 
5,348 
5,032 



Cost items cover feed and bedding; labor; use of buildings, equipment, 
and bull; interest; depreciation; miscellaneous items; and overhead. 
The yearly cost of keeping a cow was found to range from $101.62 to 
$127.76. Of the various cost items, the proportions ranged: 

Per cent 

Feed 48.5 to 57.2 

Labor 22 . 8 to 31 . 7 

All other charges for an average production 17 . 2 to 24 . 

Feed factors in milk production for these dairy farms were found to be: 





Annual quantity of feed per cow 


Total • 


Farm 


Co ncentrates 
pounds 


Dry roughage 
pounds 


Silage 
pounds 


Pasture 


feed 
cost 


Wisconsin 


1,605 

2,855 
1,423 
2,320 


1,907 
2,663 
2,308 
4,298 


7,081 

11,638 

8,311 

3,867 


$6.84 
1.69 
4.30 
3.77 


i$4Q IS 


Michigan 


71 72 


Pennsylvania 


51 30 


North Carolina 


62 62 







Items of credit amounted to from $12.27 to $20.32 for manure, calves, 
hides, bull service, feed, sacks, and premiums. 

Vermont Milk Production Costs: 1916-1917, — Story and Tubbs in a 
report^"^ of 212 Vermont dairy farms studied during the year of May 1, 
1916, to April 30, 1917, found the net cost per gallon, f.o.b. station, to 
be 19.1^. The average feed amounted to: 

Pounds 

Grain 1 , 240 

Silage 5 ,440 

Other succulents 400 

Hay 3 ,500 

Pasturage (provided, but amount not stated) 

Average production of 5,328 lb. 



452 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Total gross cost per cow per year amounted to $136.11, to which could 
be credited increased inventory value, manure, calves, hides, and feed 
bags, totaling $24.25. The gross costs were divided into: 

Per cent 

Feed 49 

Labor 26 

Overhead 25 

A blank for use in studying cost of milk production is included. 
California Milk Production Costs: 1916-17. — Summaries of estimates 
furnished by 36 California dairymen supplying milk to the cities around 
San Francisco Bay, reported by Elwood Mead in Circular 175 (Oct., 
1917) by the California Agricultural Experiment Station, indicates a cost 
per gallon delivered of 

16.23^ in 1916 
22.7 (^in 1917 

Some of the increase is shown in the increased costs of feeds which 
average 38.2 per cent greater in 1917 than in 1916. 

Findings for southern and central California show a range in costs of 
from 16 to 21(2^ per gallon in 1917. 

Minnesota Milk Production Costs: 1908-1917. — Peck and Boss in a 
36-page bulletin'^^" outline the factors of cost entering into the produc- 
tion of milk, and report findings on a total of 1,304 cows studied by 
means of three statistical routes in Minnesota covering periods from 
1908 to 1916. 

Their findings show the net cost of milk to be : 



Locality 


Net cost per gallon, 
cents 


Pounds of milk pro- 
duced annually per 
cow 


Northfield. 


20.8 
21.7 
20.9 


5,540 


Halstead 


4,849 


Cokato 


4,944 







The total gross cost per cow and the percentage of feed, labor, and 
other items was found to be : 





Locality 


Gross 

cost per 

cow 


Percentage of gross cost 


Value of 




Feed 


Labor 


Other costs 


credits 


Northfield 


$159.43 
147.83 
145.43 


47 
51 
48 


26 
23 
25 


27 
26 
27 


$25 . 00 
25.00 
25.00 


Halstead 


Cokato 





LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 453 

The amount of animal labor to care for a cow was found to be: 





Locality 


Annually 




Man-hours 


Horse-hours 


Northfield 

Halstead 

Cokato 


145 

160 
132 


40 
17 
34 







The feed requirements per cow were found to be: 





Northfield 


Halstead 


Cokato 


Grain, pounds 

Roughage, pounds 


1,058 

3,917 

4,020 

167 


866 
4,843 
2,993 

139 


1,119 
3,972 


Silage, pounds 


177 


Pasture, days 


4,944 







Missouri Milk Production Costs: 1916-17-18. — As a result of study- 
ing Missouri dairy farms in furnishing milk, 49 to St. Louis, 23 to St. 
Joseph, and 29 to Kansas City, the net cost per gallon of milk was re- 
ported^" to be: 



Area 


Number 
cows 


Period covered by study 


Net cost 

per gallon, 

cents 


Average 

product 

per cow, 

pounds 


St. Louis 

St. Joseph 

Kansas City 


1,045 
749 
780 


Dec. 1, 1916 to Dec. 1, 1917 
Jan. 1, 1917 to Jan. 1, 1918 
Jan. 1, 1917 to Jan. 1, 1918 


31.99 
35.42 
25.50 


5,380 
5,950 
5,625 



Total gross costs of keeping a cow were found to be : 



Area 



Gross annual 

cost of 

keeping a 

cow 



Percentages of cost 



Feed 



Labor 



Other items 



Amount 

of annual 

credit 



St. Louis. . . . 
St. Joseph . . 
Kansas City 



$208.99 
230.88 
175.43 



46 
53 
52 



21 
26 

28 



33 
21 
20 



$12.13 
12.33 
17.39 



454 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Feeds required to keep a cow a year amounted to: 



Feed 



Area 



St. Louis 



St. Joseph 



Kansas City 



Grain, pounds. . . . 
Roughage, pounds 

Silage, pounds 

Fodder 

.Pasture 



1,607 

2,480 

17,120 

5 shocks 



4,369 
4,000 
3,900 
1 shock 



1,627 (o) 
3,400 (a) 
5,560 



Stated in money values 



(a) Calculated from other data. 

The amount of labor per cow per year: 



Area 


Man-hours 


Horse-hours 


St. Louis 


166 
246 
200 


97 


St. Joseph 


140 


Kansas City 


68 







For delivering milk direct to St. Louis customers, an average of nine 
dairies, totaling 141 cows, resulted in annual labor requirements of 20,674 
man-hours and 23,959 horse-hours. 

The figures of gross cost are based upon the working herd, for costs 
of feed at market prices minus the cost of hauling; labor; purchases of 
cattle; death of cattle; veterinary fees; breeding fees, if paid; bedding, 
interest, taxes and insurance on cattle, real estate, equipment; deprecia- 
tion of real estate and equipment; rent; repairs; ice; salt and stock food; 
feed grinding; power and fuel ; express. Miscellaneous credits consist of 
manure, cattle sold, feed sacks, hides, increase in inventory. Ten per 
cent of net cost is added for managerial ability and risk. 

Cost of Keeping Dairy Cows: New Hampshire, Massachusetts, 
Connecticut. — The annual gross cost of keeping a cow, the value of credits 
other than milk, and the calculated cost per gallon of milk, were found 
to be: 



Area 


Year 


Annual gross 

cost of keeping 

cow 


Value of 
credits 


Net cost per 

gallon of milk, 

cents 


New Hampshire"^ 


1913 
1913 
1912 


$150.02 
162 . 39 
147.73 


$15.00 
17.00 
18.00 


17 


Massachusetts^'' 


20 


Connecticut'** 


16.7 







LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



455 



New York Milk Production Costs: 1912-1913. — New York investi- 
gators found^^* the cost of keeping dairy cows during 1912 and 1913 to 
total: 




Grade herds 

Pure bred herds. 



$130.90 
139.90 



On segregating and averaging the various costs, the percentages 
were worked out as follows: 

Per cent 

Forage 16 

Bedding 2 

Silage 14 

Grain 26 

Pasture 4 

Veterinary * 

Man labor 20 

Horse labor 3.5 

Equipment labor * 

Use of buildings 3.5 • 

Interest 6 

Miscellaneous 4 

*Less than 1 per cent. 

The average quantities of feed given the herds, the amount of labor 
required for their care, and the amount of milk produced were found to be : 

Table 204. — Average Feed Used, Labor Required, and Milk Produced, 

Dairying — New York 





1912 


1913 




Grade 
cows 


Pure- 

breds 


Grade 
cows 


Pure- 
bred 


Pounds of straw for feed and bedding 
per cattle unit 


617 
6,152 (a) 
1,865 
1,313 

117 
13 


160 

10,320 

2,800 

2,660 

130 

19 


779 
6,737 
3,190 
1,551 

116 

19 

7,926 (6) 


798 


Pounds of silage per cattle unit 

Pounds of other forage per cattle unit 

Pounds of grain per cattle unit 

Man hours per cattle unit 


6,791 

3,216 

2,339 

161 


Horse hours per cattle unit 

Pounds of milk per cow 


23 

8,222 (c) 





(a) One farm did not feed silage and was omitted from this average. 

(b) Average for 13 of 17 herds. 

(c) Average for two out of five herds. 



456 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Indiana Milk Production Costs: 1915-1917. — A 2-year study of the cost 
of milk production, undertaken cooperatively by the United States Dairy 
Division and Purdue University, on a number of dairy farms in northwest- 
ern Indiana, resulted in figures on the requirements for producing 100 lb. of 
milk in winter and likewise in summer. To give permanent value to the 
results, these requirements were determined in pounds of feed, hours of 
labor, etc. 

In the summer months the requirements for 100 lb. of milk were found 
to be: Concentrates, 20 lb.; dry roughage, 27.4 lb.; silage and other suc- 
culent roughage, 60.1 lb.; hauling and grinding concentrates, $0,014; 
pasture, 0.04 acres; human labor, 2.2 hr.; horse labor, 0.2 hr.; overhead 
and other costs, $0,393. 

In the winter months the requirements for production amounted to : 
Concentrates, 38.6 lb.; dry roughage, 66.8 lb.; silage and other succulent 
roughage, 147.6 lb.; hauhng and grinding concentrates, $0.03; bedding, 
20.3 lb.; human labor, 2.5 hr.; horse labor, 0.3 hr.; overhead and other 
costs, $0,385. 

While the gross cost of producing milk is shown to be considerably 
higher in winter than in summer, the figures obtained in this investiga- 
tion show that the net cost of producing 100 lb. of milk from November 
to April. was only 1.8 per cent higher than the cost from May to October, 
incliisive, and that the total cost varied only slightly from month to 
month within each of these seasons. This small difference between net 
winter cost and net summer cost was found to be largely due to the 
greater credit allowed for manure during the winter season. 

The price received for the milk, however, fluctuated sharply from 
month to month. 

Further details on requirements for milk production, including such 
factors as cost of keeping a cow for one year, cost of keeping a bull, pro- 
portion of work performed by each class of labor, percentage relation 
of various factors in the cost of production, etc., are presented. ^^^ 

Illinois Milk Production Studies: 1914-16. — Data collected by de- 
tailed cost accounting based on 18 farms producing wholesale market 
milk, for the years 1914-15, 1915-16, cover 407 cows, 19 bulls, and 234 
young stock. The findings^ ^^ show the average cost of producing 100 lb. 
of milk to be $1.71 for the year, $2.00 for the 6 winter months, and $1.30 
for the 6 summer months. The monthly variation ranged from 94^ to 
2.14^. The study emphasizes the importance of ample pasture and 
suggests a fluctuating price for the year adjusted to farmers' costs of 
production. 

Given in terms of quantity it was found that the cow cost of 100 lb. 
of milk produced amounted to: 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



457 



Average for year 

Man labor 2. 29 hr. 

Feed 

Grain 32. 4 lb. 

Hay 36.5 lb. 

Other forage 25 . 9 lb. 

Silage 154. lb. 

Percentage that feed and labor form of net cost 77 . 8 per cent. 

Reference to Outline for Conducting Cost of Milk Production Studies. 

A set of carefully prepared forms with directions for use in determining 
the farm cost of producing milk can be found in a publication of Cornell 
University, entitled "Calculating the Cost of Milk Production. "^^^ The 
publication discusses charges or costs segregated into feed, concentrates, 
succulents, dry forage, pasture; bedding; labor— man and horse; use of 
buildings; use of equipment; depreciation of cows; interest; bull service; 
miscellaneous charges, with methods of determining. Credits or returns 
involve milk and its products used and sold, calves, hides, manure, and 
miscellaneous returns. Details of analyzing the records and certain 
tables of data complete a presentation fo value indetermining or checking 
up figures and methods having to do with costs of milk production. 

Miscellaneous Costs 

Costs of Clearing Land : Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin : Reported 

1914. — With labor at $1.75 to $2.00 the cost of clearing land originally 
forested in the Lake States of Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin, 
ranged from $5.99 to $86.00 per acre, although mostly about $25.00 per 
acre, the cost being influenced by the number and variety of the stumps, 
the soil, the method used, and the efficiency of the men and equipment. 
The cost per stump ranged from 25 to SQ<^ although usually running 
from 35^ to 70^.ii9 

Cost of Tile Drainage : Ohio : 1910-11. — An Ohio circularise gives 
an idea of the cost of tile draining. Rates are here omitted where quan- 
tities are given. Figures are averaged for the 3 years reported. 

Table 205. — Costs of Tile Drainage — Ohio 



Per rod 


Man labor 
hours 


Horse labor 
hours 


Money figures 


Hauling tile 


0.05 

1.5 

0.12 


0.11 
0.12 


019 


Trenching and laying tile by hand. 
Filling ditches 


0.376 
0.030 


Other equipment costs 

Cost of tile 


0.004 
217 


Overhead charges 

Surveying and plotting drains 


0.023 
0.016 




0.685 



458 



FARM MANAGEMENT' 



Labor Requirements in Connection With Live Stock. — Studies 
conducted in different facts of the country give findings as shown in the 
next table concerning man and horse labor necessary to care of live stock: 

Table 206. — Labor Requirements in Connection with Live Stock 



Labor requirements annually 



Kind of stock 




Stallion or jack 

Brood mare or jennet 

Dairy cow 

Cattle, colts, horses, or mules running loose — 

each 

Ewes — each 

Brood sows, pigs to W3aning, per litter 

Shoats, each 



Labor Requirements of Dairy Cows. — A number of studies have been 
conducted to note the amount of labor required annually in caring for 
dairy cows. 

Missouri"^ found the annual labor per cow for dairies in the vicinity 
of St. Louis to amount to : 



St. Louis 



Horse-hours 




Milking and feeding 

Handling milk 

Hauling milk 

Miscellaneous dairy work 

Total 



Minnesota^ ^^ found hours of man and horse labor to be annually per 



cow: 



Locality 


Man-hours 


Horse-hours 


Northfield 

Halstad 

Cokato 


145 
160 
132 


40 
17 
34 



The United States Department of Agriculture studying four farms^^ 
determined the annual labor requirements per cow to average over a 
period of 6 years: 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



459 



Locality 


Man-hours 


Horse-hours 


Wisconsin 


214 
230 
170 
262 


33 


Michigan 


32 




21 


North Carolina 


55 






Labor Requirements 


of Work Horses. — Missouri^^^ 
a work horse annually to be: 


found the labor 


Year 


Man-hours 


Horse-hours 


1912-13 

1914 

1915 


71.0 
81.7 
79.5 


6.3 

12.4 

4.1 


Average 


78.4 




7.6 











Labor Requirements of Work Horses, Illinois, Ohio and New York: 1909. 
The United States Department of Agriculture^^^ [i^ ^ study of costs of 
keeping farm horses determined the annual labor requirements to be for 
selected Illinois, Ohio and New York farms per horse: 



Locality 


Man-hours 


Horse-hours 


Illinois 


85.2 
164.6 
127.3 


13.1 


Ohio 


8.2 


New York 


8.5 







A study of the 316 horses on these 27 farms resulted in an itemized 
summary of average annual costs and credits per horse as follows: 
Table 207. — Cost of Keeping Work Horses — Illinois, Ohio and New York 

(gross costs) 



Item 



Illinois 
(154 horses) 



Cost Per cent 



Ohio (72 horses) 



Cost Per cent 



New York 
(90 horses) 



Cost Per cent 



Feed and bedding*. 

Labor 

Interest 

Stabling 

Use of equipment. . 

Shoeing 

Depreciation 

Net loss on colts . . . 
Miscellaneous 



68.75 
13.99 
7.90 
4.95 
3.82 
0.86 
3.46 
0.04 
2.12 



65.0 
13.2 

7.4 
4.7 
3.6 
0.8 
3.3 

2.0 



76.86 


58.8 


$91.25 


27.48 


21.0 


22.09 


8.66 


6.6 


9.43 


7.18 


5.5 


12.98 


5.00 


3.8 


5.85 


2.35 


1.8 


4.56 
11.56 


1.24 


1.0 




1.90 


1.5 


2.09 


30.67 


100.0 


$159.81 



57.1 
13.8 
5.9 
8.1 
3.7 
2.9 
7.2 

1.3 



*The item of bedding is included with feed, because on many farms straw was used 
as a feed and as bedding, and owing to the fact that refuse from the managers was 
used for bedding, it was contrary to actual practice to attempt to make bedding a 
separate item. 



460 


FARM MANAGEMENT 

Credits 




Manure 


$5.24 


$ 8.20 
2.10 


$13 36 


Horse appreciation 




Colt profit 


1 43 








Total 


$5.24 


$10.30 


$14.79 


Net Cost 


Cost of keeping, less 


credits 


$100.65 $120.37 


$145.02 



The feed factor in costs of keeping work horses was divided into three 
classes, namely grain, roughage, and pasture. By states, these amounted 
to, in this study :^^^ 

Table 208. — The Feed Factor in Costs of Keeping Work Horses — Illinois, 

Ohio and New York 



Kind of feed 



Illinois 
(15 horses) 



Average 
quantity 
per horse 



Average 

cost per 

horse 



Ohio (72 horses) 



Average 
quantity 
per horse 



Average 

cost per 

horse 



New York 
(90 horses) 



Average 
quantity 
per horse 



Average 

per 

horse 



Grain, pounds 

Roughage (1), pounds, 
Pasture, days 

Total 



4,500 

4,224 

148 



$44.93 

16.13 

7.69 

$68 . 75 



3,347 

6,660 

68 



$40.71 

32.65 

3.50 

$76.86 



2,691 

9,513 

34 



$38.55 

51.20 

1.50 

$91.25 



Labor costs amounted to: 





Man labor 


Horse labor 


Total cost 




Cost per 
hour, cents 


Total cost 


Cost per 
hour, cents 


Total cost 




Illinois 

Ohio 


15.0 
16.0 
16.4 


$12.74 
26.34 

20.88 


13.0 
13.9 
14.2 


$1.25 
1.14 
1.21 


$13.99 

27 48 


New York 


22 09 







The greatest item of cost in keeping a farm work horse is feed. 
The farmer who gets the maximum of work out of his horses, and 
at the same time has a low feed cost, is reasonably sure of obtaining horse 
labor at a low cost per hour. An illustration of this fact is brought out 
in the next table. 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



461 



Table 209. — Relation of Work Done to the Total Feed Cost of Work Horses 

(27 farms, 316 horses) 





Illinois (154 horses 


Ohio (72 horses 


aver- 


New York (90 horses 




average hours worked 


age hours worked 867) 


average hours worked 




1,053) 






1,020) 




Aver 


Aver- 


Aver- 


Aver- 


Aver- 


Aver- 


Aver- 


Aver- 


Aver- 




age 


age 


age 


age 


age 


age 


age 


age 


age 




hours 


feed 


feed 


hours 


feed 


feed 


hours 


feed 


feed 




worked 


cost 


fcost 


worked 


cost 


cost 


worked 


cost 


cost 




per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 


per 




horse 


horse 


hour 


horse 


horse 


hour 


horse 


horse 


hour 


Above the average 


1,200 


$75. 20 


$0. 063 


1,055 


$89.00 


$0. 084 


1,172 


$97.30 


$0,084 


Below the average 


880 


67.30 


0.077 


723 


67.30 


0.093 


863 


85.00 


0.098 




320 


$ 7.90 


$0,014 


332 


$21.70 


$0,009 


309 


$12.30 


$0,014 







The cost per hour in these States was found to be : 

Table 210. — Cost of Horse Labor per Hour 



State 


Aven 
Per year 


ige hours w( 

Per week 
day 


jrked 

Per Sunday 


Average 
net cost 
per horse 


Average 

cost per 

hour 

worked 


Illinois (154 horses) 

Ohio (72 horses) 

New York (90 horses). . . 


1,053 

866 

1,020 


3.30 
2.70 
3.24 


0.40 
0.46. 
0.13 


$100.65 
120.37 
145.02 


9.56 
13.90 
14.22 



Cost of Work Horses, Missouri: 1912-15. — A Missouri study ^^^ cover- 
ing a total of 320 work horses on 59 farms studied during the years 1912- 
15 inclusive resulted in these findings: 

Average Annual Cost of Keep of a Farm Work Horse Based on the 
Four-Year Period, 1912-13-14-15 



Number horses 



Labor cost per 
head 



Feed cost per 
head 



Miscellaneous 
cost per head 



Total cost per 
head (not in- 
cluding depre- 
ciation) 



320 



m.03 
12. 1 per cent 



$65.65 
72.0 per cent 



$14.54 
15.9 per cent 



$ 91.22 
100.0 per cent 



462 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Classification of miscellaneous costs in caring for a work horse was: 

Per Cent 

Building charge 28 . 1 

Interest on investment 49 . 3 

Taxes 4.2 

Veterinary expert 3.2 

Shoeing 4.6 

Equipment charge 1.4 

Incidentals 9.2 

Total 100.0 

Depreciation was not included in this study for the stated reason that 
this factor vary greatly. 

This study showed average annual amount of labor per horse to be 
for 1912-13, 1,165 hr.; 1914, 1,164 hr., and 1915, 1,127 hr. The conclu- 
sion is drawn that from the viewpoint of economy in managing horse 
labor, experience on the farms studied, seems to warrant keeping sufficient 
work stock on a general farm of this region so that each horse will not 
have more than an average of 1,400 or 1,500 hr. of work, but it will not 
warrant a large enough supply to make the average amount of labor per 
horse less than 800 hr. 

Costs of Work Horses, Minnesota: 1904. — Parker and Cooper,^* study- 
ing the cost of producing Minnesota farm products, reported the cost of 
keeping work horses for the years 1904-1907. Their group findings are 
condensed in the table immediately below : 



Table 211. — Average Annual Cost of Maintaining a Farm Work Horse 

(Minnesota) 



Item 



Range in money 
costs 



Average 

money 

costs 



Per cent of 

each to 

entire cost 



Interest on investment. 

Depreciation 

Harness 

Feed 

Shoeing 

Labor 

Miscellaneous expenses 

Totals 



I 3.24- 6.74 
0.98-15.48 
0.32- 3.64 

37.69-75.03 
0.10- 1.55 
9.65-22.73 
0.18- 1.64 



I 5.12 
6.10 
1.70 

54.84 
0.68 

15.20 
0.50 



14 



6.1 

7.2 

2 
65.3 

0.8 
18.1 

0.6 



100.0 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



463 



Costs of Work Horses, New York: 1912 and 1913. — Investigators ^^^ find 
the cost of keeping a horse unit one year to be: 

Table 212. — Costs of Work Horses — New York, 1912 and 1913 
(73.8 horse units in 1912, 189.8 horse units in 1913) 



Item 



1912 



Average 

cost per 

horse unit 



Per cent 

of total 

cost 



1913 



Average 

cost per 

horse unit 



Per cent 

of total 

cost 



Forage and bedding 

Grain 

Shoeing 

Veterinary and medicine 

Man labor 

Equipment labor 

Use of buildings 

Interest 

Miscellaneous 

Depreciation 

Total cost 

Manure 

Miscellaneous receipts 

Total manure and miscellaneous 

Net cost 



$42.96 

57.72 

4.24 

2.00 

23.55 

0.82 

5.75 

8.77 

0.38 

14.03 

$160.22 



12.34 
0.28 

$12.62 

$147.60 



27 
36 
3 
1 
15 
1 
3 
5 



$40.90 

46.39 

4.87 

0.69 

22.97 

0.67 

5.92 

'7.82 

2.63 

12.10 

$144.96 



12.63 
3.33 

$ 15.96 

$129.00 



28 
32 
3 
1 
16 
1 
4 
5 
2 
8 



Costs of Work Horses, Texas: 1914. — In ElHs County, Texas, the average 
annual cost of keeping work stock per head was found to be $101.37.^ 
This cost was made up of feed, 82.2 per cent; interest, 10.6 per cent (at 
8 per cent on an average valuation of $135 per head) ; depreciation, 6 per 
cent; shoeing, 1 per cent and veterinary cost 2 per cent. No labor in 
caring for stock is included. 

Cost of Work Horses, Colorado: 1910-13. — Colorado reports^24 ^j^g 
cost of maintaining horse labor averaged for the years 1910-13. 

The costs were subdivided, showing the interest and depreciation on 
harness and on the barn in which the horses were quartered; the man labor 
performed for or on the horses; the horse labor for horses; hay, grain 
straw, grinding feed; chores; miscellaneous barn supplies; interest 
and depreciation on the horses themselves. Where the progeny increased 
in value this increase was deducted from the total of the itemized costs. 



464 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 213. — Costs of Horse Labor — Colorado, 1910-13 



Item 



1910 



Cost 



1911 



1912 



Cost 



Cost 



1913 



Cost 



4-year 
Average 



Interest and depreciation on 
harness 

Interest and depreciation on 
horse barn 

Man labor 

Horse labor 

Hay 

Grain 

Straw 

Grinding 

Chores 

Supplies 

Interest and depreciation on 
horses 



Total cost per year. 



$79.02 $ 51.78 



400.00 
97.60 
23.40 

734 . 84 
808.90 

71.21 
0.50 

106 . 85 
326.55 

446 . 00 



,094.87 



400.00 

82.11 

17.60 

825.57 

1,108.70 

62.26 

2.65 

127.94 

108.55 

446.00 



,233.16 



$ 69.04,$ 58.76 



400.00 

90.80 

30.28 

620 . 04 

803 . 87 

84.14 

5.43 

150.50 

202 . 90 

382.00 



$2,839.00 



400.00 
126.60 

38.11 
688.08 
916.59 

93.50 

75.10 
300.45 

386.00 



,083.19 



$ 64.65 

400 . 00 

99.28 

27.35 

717.13 

909.51 

77.78 

2.86 

115.10 

234.61 

415.00 



,063.27 



Less value of progeny increase. 



368.00 



Net cost per year $2 , 695 . 27 

Average number horse-hours 30 ,258 

Cost per horse-hour $0 . 088 



Machinery Costs, Machinery Costs, Ohio: 1909.— Studies in 1909 
of 21 Ohio farms resulted in determination of machinery costs per acre 
and per year, as tabulated below :^^ 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 465 

Table 214. — Cost per Acre and per Year of Machinery on Ohio Farms 



I\ind of machine 



Years 



Depreciation 



Per 
year 



Per 

cent 



Repairs 
per 


Inter- 
est per 


Total 
cost 
per 
year 


year 


year 



Acres 

worked 

per 

year 



Walking plow 

Riding or gang plow. . . . 

Harrow, spike 

Harrow, spring 

Harrow, disc 

Roller 

Planker or drag 

Weeder 

Manure spreader 

Corn planter 

Cultivator, 1-horse 

Cultivator, 2- or 3-horse 

Corn binder 

Corn shocker 

Grain binder 

Grain drill 

Fanning mill 

Hay loader 

Mowing machine 

Hay rake 

Hay tedder 

Wagon 

Corn shredder 

Ensilage cutter 

Corn sheller 



9.6 
5.6 
8.3 
9.0 
7.4 
11.3 
6.5 
7.2 
3.2 
7.8 
8.5 
7.9 
6.3 
4.0 



8.6 
8.7 
9.3 
7.9 
7.8 
8.5 
8.0 

11.5 
3.0 
6.3 

11.5 



$0.69 


5.1 


2.54 


5.4 


0.68 


5.5 


1.03 


6.0 


1.62 


6.0 


0.75 


3.3 


0.24 


8.0 


0.70 


6,5 


9.30 


8.3 


2.20 


6.2 


0.26 


6.3 


1.57 


6.3 


8.48 


8.0 


12.92 


10.7 


8.13 


7.0 


2.81 


4.7 


0.76 


3.7 


3.47 


6.0 


2.56 


6.1 


1.11 


5.8 


1.63 


5.2 


3.00 


4.8 


43.17 


9.1 


6.32 


5.7 


0.38 


3.9 



0.71 


$0.53 


$1.93 


0.96 


2.01 


5.25 


0.29 


0.50 


1.47 


0.21 


0.64 


1.89 


0.27 


1.08 


2.97 


0.03 


0.93 


1.71 




0.11 


0.35 




0.41 


1.11 


1.58 


5.11 


16.29 


0.47 


1.40 


4.07 


0.07 


0.19 


0.52 


0.34 


0.95 


2.86 


1.60 


4.14 


14.26 


0.79 


5.07 


18.78 


1.10 


4.31 


13.54 


0.33 


2.44 


5.58 




0.88 


1.64 


0.65 


2.89 


7.01 


0.93 


1.65 


5.14 


0.26 


0.75 


2.12 


0.40 


1.30 


3.73 


1.20 


2.35 


6.55 


0.98 


21.56 


65.71 


0.83 


4.72 


11.87 


0.04 


0.39 


0.81 



27.1 

28.8 
79.2 
38.8 
60.4 
84.2 
45.4 
34.4 

50.1 
12.1 
69.7 
38.5 
22.3 
51.1 
43.0 

28.3 
49.1 
38.8 
22.5 



Machinery Costs, New York: 1912-13. — Important special machinery 
costs were found to be for New York^^^ for horse implements, including 
harnesses and small tools: 

Table 215. — Machinery Costs — New York, 1912-13 



Year 
1912 


Num- 
ber of 
farms 


Investment Invest- 
in equip- ment per 
ment per crop 
farm acre 


Annual 
cost 


Per cent of 
average in- 
vestment in 
annual cost 


Cost 
per 
crop 
acre 


Cost 
per 
horse- 
hour 


1912 
1913 


13 
31 


$981.46 
922 . 93 


$9.80 
8.28 


$249 . 62 
271.56 


25.4 
29.4 


$2.49 
2.44 


$0.0503 
0.0513 



80 



466 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



The annual cost was distributed over : 

Table 216. — Details of Machinery Costs — New York, 1912-13 





1912 


1913 




Per cent of total 
cost 


Per cent of total 
cost 


Depreciation 

Cash repairs 

Oil 

Use of buildings 

Interest 


39 

16 

1 

12 

19 

8 

2 

3 


45 
14 
1 
13 
17 


Man labor 


7 


Horse labor 

Miscellaneous 


1 
2 



Machinery Costs, New York: 1916. — Machinery costs in western New 
York were investigated by Mo wry and reported in a Department of 
Agriculture bulletin. ^^5 'pj^g items of depreciation and repairs are here 
reduced to percentages, since costs are variable. Interest is omitted. 
Table 217. — Machinery Costs — New York — ^1916 



Implement 



Average 
days 
work 

per year 



Life of 
implement 



Acres covered 



Days 

of 
work 



Years 



Per 

year 



Total 



Average annual 
percentage of 
first cost for 



Depre- 
ciation 



Repairs 



Walking plow 

Sulky plow 

Spring-tooth harrow. . 
Spike- tooth harrow. . . 

Disc harrow 

Land roller 

Grain drill . . 

Corn planter, 1-row. . 
Corn planter, 2-row. . 
Cultivator, 1-row . . . . 
Cultivator, 2-row. . . . 
Cabbage transplanter 

Mower 

Hay rake 

Hay tedder 

Bean harvester 

Grain binder 

Corn binder 



19.2 
14.7 
6.6 
3 1 
4.2 
4.7 
4.6 
0.9 
0.8 
4.1 
5.6 
3.4 
3.1 
2.6 
1.5 
2.3 
3.4 
3.7 



224 
119 
73 
43 
54 
75 
76 
10 
9 
58 
70 
43 
46 
37 
21 
29 
53 
40 



11.7 


32.9 


8.1 


30.9 


11.0 


71.1 


14.0 


48.3 


13.0 


35.2 


16.0 


65.9 


16.4 


46.3 


11.7 


4.1 


11.0 


8.2 


14.0 


16.9 


12.5 


39.3 


12.8 


12.5 


14.8 


28.0 


14.5 


43.0 


14.0 


21.6 


12.9 


16.9 


15.4 


35.2 


10.8 


21.1 



384.9 
250.2 
782.1 
676.2 
457.6 
1054.4 
759.3 
48.0 
91.3 
236.6 
491.3 
160.0 
414.4 
623.5 
302.4 
218.0 
542.1 
227.9 



8.6 
12.4 
9.2 
7.7 
7.0 
6.6 
6.0 
8.2 
8.2 
6.8 
7.9 
6.3 
5.6 
4.3 
6.5 
6.8 
7.0 
8.4 



20.4 
37.0 
50.0 
3.4 
1.4 
2.0 
1.4 
6.0 
4.1 
5.0 
3.1 
2.5 
4.2 
1.3 
1.1 
4.1 
1.4 
1.7 



LIVE STOCK AND STOCK PRODUCTS 



467 



Cost of Machinery, Texas: 1914.— In Ellis County, Texas, depreciation 
of machinery was found to be at the rate of 14 per cent.^ 

Cost of Machinery, Colorado: 1910-13. — In Colorado machine costs 
during 1910-1913 averaged in cost per acre of use:^^^ 

Table 218. — Machinery Costs — Colorado 





Annual use, acres 


Cost per acre 


Plows and eveners 

Drill 


105 
120 
172 

31 
156 
258 

64 

85 
155 

12 


$0.40 
0.18 


Harrows 

Discs 

Mowers 


0.02 
0.26 
0.17 


Wagons 


0.01 


Manure spreaders 


2.20 


Binders 


0.96 


Rakes 


0.17 


Cultivators 


0.07 



Machinery Costs, Minnesota: 1902-7. — Based on cash values of the 
time (1902-1907), Parker and Cooper found^'' the acreage cost of Minne- 
sota machinery when made up of depreciation, and repairs, and interest 
on the average annual investment, divided by a figure of the amount 
of use, to be: 

Table 219. — Machinery Costs — Minnesota 



Machinery- 



Average 



Grain machinery: 

Binders 

Reapers 

Drills, seeders 

Fanning mills 

Grain tanks 

Wagons, sleds, and racks 
Com machinery: 

Binders 

Planters 

Cultivators 

Wagons, sleds, and racks 
Hay machinery: 

Mowers 

Rakes 

Tedders 

Loaders 

Ropes, forks, etc 

Wagons, sleds, and racks 
All crop machinery: 

Plows 

Harrows . . . 

Discs 

Thrashing outfit 



f0.181 
0.171 
0.075 
0.010 
0.011 
0.034 

0.826 
0.087 
0.155 
0.158 

0.206 
0.085 
0.113 
0.151 
0.120 
0.059 

0.087 
0.017 
0.089 
0.335 



468 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



U. S. Hauling Costs: 1905-6. — Hauling costs vary with distance, 
commodity, size of load, size of team, time consumed in loading and 
unloading. Certain data^^^ are available indicating something of the 
various factors. Details for various states may be consulted in the 
original source, as only summaries of selected items are extracted. 



Table 220. — Hauling Costs in United States — 1905-06 



Product 



Miles to ship- 
ping point 



Days for round 
trip 



Average size of 
load 



Apples 

Barley 

Beans 

Corn 

Cotton 

Fruit (other than apples) 

Hay 

Hogs (live) 

Oats 

Potatoes 

Rice 

Tobacco 

Vegetable (other than potatoes) . . 

Wheat 

Wool 



9.6 
8.8 
9.0 
7.4 
11.8 
11.6 
8.3 
7.9 
7.3 
8.2 
7.5 
9.8 
9 8 
9.4 
39.8 



0.9 
0.7 
0.8 
0.6 
1.0 
1.1 
0.7 
0.7 
0.6 
0.7 
0.8 
0.8 
0.8 
0.8 
5.6 



2,300 
3,970 
3,172 
2,696 
1,702 
2,181 
2,786 
1,941 
2,772 
2,679 
2,407 
2,248 
1,852 
3,323 
4,869 



CHAPTER XX 
MARKETING METHODS 

Marketing is the goal of production. Farm management is therefore 
concerned not only with the production of crops, stock, or stock products, 
but with their disposal when ready to market. In the proper selling of 
farm products rests much of the profit-getting ability of the producer. 
A knowledge of marketing is therefore essential. The field is so broad, 
however, that most men who are concerned with both production and 
selling tend to concentrate on certain phases of marketing rather than to 
attempt an intimate knowledge of the entire field. Some of the funda- 
mentals are not particularly difficult to understand; some of the complex 
relations where various channels of distribution and many consumers 
are involved require concentrated, intensive, and prolonged study. 
If to the acquisition of the necessary information concerning marketing 
methods is added a well developed ability to direct selling in ways that will 
help the farm business, the resulting combination goes far to insure 
successful returns. 

In the limited space here available for marketing discussion, atten- 
tion will be drawn to the simpler elements affecting the farm manager 
in his efforts to make his activities profitable. One's interest, coupled 
with opportunity, should impel far deeper investigation and the acquisi- 
tion of marketing knowledge whenever experience shows the need of 
keener individual understanding concerning the best disposal of farm 
products. Earnest inquiry into market methods and conditions soon 
leads the investigator to realize — and with appreciation — that marketing 
vitally affects consumer as well as producer. Markets are found to be 
influenced of course by world-wide conditions, but also even by quite 
minor factors affecting supply and demand. A strike of feather pluckers 
may cause a drop in prices to poultry producers. A local weather con- 
dition may lessen a demand, as when a spell of cold causes watermelon 
sales to slacken. 

Any local condition — e.g., transportation difficulties, lack of competi- 
tion among buyers, etc. — may have no far reaching effect, yet may spoil a 
season for individual farmers. 

The several phases of marketing here discussed do not by any means 
exhaust the field. They serve merely to introduce the field of marketing 
as it affects farm managers, and to suggest the need of additional 

469 



470 FARM MANAGEMENT 

individual study. The old adage that "he who makes two blades of grass 
grow where one grew before is a public benefactor" gives way under the 
application of business principles to farming to the idea that he who 
makes two blades grow when there is a market only for one, or at a cost 
for the two that leaves no profit, hurts not only himself but the entire 
farming business. 

Imports and Exports as Guides to Conditions. — The import and export 
trade of the United States indicates broadly the status of the farming 
industry. But deductions from such figures are not valuable for local 
conditions. For instance, it may be cheaper for the Pacific Coast to buy 
Australian products shipped over-seas than New England goods shipped 
by rail; and conversely for the same instance it may pay New England 
farmers to ship to Europe over-seas rather than to meet the high freight 
rates to the Pacific seaboard or even to less distant interior points. 

In general, deductions worth while can be drawn only when the differ- 
ence between the amount of any product brought in and that sent out 
is rather large. Gauged over a period of years, it is evident that, if the 
exports maintain a high figure, we are producing more than we need; 
conversely, if the imports are great, we are bringing in more than we are 
producing. 

Since a country exports when there is a big home crop or over-pro- 
duction, and imports when there is a scanty crop or under-production, 
figures of imports and exports are of considerable interest. 

Let us take, as enlightening, the imports and exports of certain goods 
for the years 1917-18-19 — ending June 30, 1919, although in this instance 
the influences of war conditions are to be recognized. The swing of exports 
and imports is so changeable, that new data accumulate rapidly and 
compel the alteration of previous deductions. ^^^ 

Fruit. — An increasing export, offset by some imports. Average im- 
ports $2.5,000,000, average exports $33,000,000. It is noteworthy that 
the United States annually imports products capable of being raised in 
her own borders, like almonds, walnuts, lemons, grapes, olives, figs, 
oranges, and even raisins, up to the value of $16,500,000. Walnuts and 
almonds make up $11,000,000 of the total; figs nearly $1,000,000; lemons 
$2,000,000; olives $1,500,000. 

Butter. — Butter exports and imports fluctuate greatly. Averaging 
the years 1917-1919, the exports exceeded imports by nearly $9,000,000 
annually. 

Milk. — Principally condensed milk, exports exceeded imports by 
average of $70,000,000 annually. 

Cheese. — Imports exceeded exports, $7,000,000. 

Cereals. — Corn, oats, and wheat fluctuate greatly based on home 
production; average annually, 1917-1919: imports $43,000,000; exports, 
$400,000,000. 



MARKETING METHODS, 



471 



Sheep. — Tendency to stability in imports and increase in export 
trade. 

Hogs (live). — No importations of importance ($400,000) while exports 
amounted only to $700,000. Mostly breeding animals imported. 

Hogs (packing house product). — A yearly average export of $500,- 
000,000. No imports to speak of— less than $1,000,000. 

Eggs. — Exports exceed imports — by 22,000,000 dozen annually 
(1917-19). 

The Effect Upon Exports of World War Conditions.— The effect of 
war conditions upon foreign markets is indicated in the following: 

Table 221. — United States Exports Compared for 1912-14 and 1917-19 



Exports of 


Increase in exports, average 


1912-14 


1917-19 


Fruit (fresh and dried) 


$ 28,000,000 

3,000,000 

166,000,000 

160,000,000 

22,000,000 

1,000,000 

7,000,000 


$ 35,000,000 


Dairy products 


86,000,000 


Grain and grain products 


718,000,000 


Packing house products 

Oils (vegetable) 


676,000,000 
55,000,000 


Rice and rice products 


13,000,000 


Vegetable (fresh and dried) 


22,000,000 







Effect of Exports Upon Prices. — In a discussion of the fluctuation in 
exports of food, the federal Bureau of Markets states :^^^ 

"A downward trend of American export trade in foodstuffs and an upward trend 
in domestic consumption marked the decade from 1900 to 1909. This trend was 
pointed out by economists as indicating that the United States would become less 
self-supporting as the increase in population outstripped the production of the 
principal foodstuffs; in other words, that this country would be an importer of food 
rather than an exporter. 

"A halt to this downward tendency was brought about by the abnormal demands 
of war, though an upward trend in the exports of breadstuffs began in the 5-year 
immediate prewar period. During the war the export trade in some cases reached 
new high points. The exportation of foodstuffs is still being made in large quantities. 
Producers are now asking the questions, does the trade which developed during the 
war indicate a new era in American foreign agricultural trade? Or is the condition 
merely temporary — simply a halting of the downward tide evident before the war? 

"During the decade from 1900 to 1909 the exports of breadstuffs, meats, and 
dairy products showed a general downward trend. Exports of the principal bread- 
stuffs declined steadily from a high of 25,800,000,000 lb. during the fiscal year ending 
June 30, 1900, to 8,600,000,000 lb. in 1905.. With a large carryover from the bumper 
crops of the preceding year, shipments to foreign countries in 1906 nearly doubled 
those of 1905. During the subsequent three years the exports continued the down- 
ward tendency. During this period, wheat formed about half the trade in 1900 
and 1901. With the exception of 1905 and 1906 wheat formed the greater part 
of the export of breadstuffs. 



472 FARM MANAGEMENT 

"Both meat and dairy products showed a similar trend, downward from 1900 to 
1905, followed by a sharp rise in 1906, and another steady decline to 1909. 

"The 5-year immediate pre-war period 1910-14 shows a decided change in the 
foreign trade in breadstuffs. Wheat, corn, oats, rye, barley, and their products 
were exported in increasingly large quantities, a reaction that can not be attributed 
to war demands. This is generally explained as due to the increased industrial- 
ization of Europe, and her increasing dependence on the Americans for agricultural 
products. 

"The outstanding feature during this immediate pre-war period is the steady 
advance in the exports of breadstuffs, although no new high levels were reached. 
In the last 2 years of this period, 1913 and 1914, wheat exports amounted to nearly 
20 per cent of our total production. 

During the war an enormous export trade in foodstuffs was built up. The average 
yearly exports of principal foodstuffs from the United States during the 5 years 1915 
to 1919 were approximately double the average for the pre-war period 1909-14. 

"The exports of breadstuffs rose steadily, reaching in 1915 the high point of 
24,981,000,000 lb., or approximately as great an amount as was exported during the 
best pre-war years 1900 and 1901. The submarine menace and low wheat yields in 
1916 and 1917 caused a sudden decline to 21,712,000,000 and 18,823,000,000 lb., 
respectively. The upward trend came again in 1918 and continued through 1919. 

"The first indications of a return to normal conditions have been noticed during 
the first half of 1920. The trend has not yet set in: only the first glimmerings are 
visible. Among these factors are: 

1. Definite efforts of foreign Governments to stimulate home production and to 
limit imports. 

2. Inability of foreign nations to finance the purchase of foodstuffs. 

3. Imports of foodstuffs from foreign countries. 

4. Recovery of agriculture in foreign countries. 

"Under the first two heads may be noted the action of the British ministry of food 
in holding cold-storage meats at high prices. The Board of Trade expected that the 
normal consumption of meat would be reached in spite of the high prices. Never- 
theless, the action had the effect of reducing the consumption and stimulating home 
production. Efforts were also made to increase the domestic production of wheat. 

"Both France and Italy have restricted the imports of wheat, another indication 
that normal conditions are expected. 

"The exportation of foreign foodstuffs to the United States during recent months, 
though small, indicates that Europe is beginning to pass its maximum demand. 

"Several cargoes of butter and more than 100,000 sacks of potatoes have come from 
Denmark. Australian and New Zealand mutton has been diverted from British 
ports to the United States. Egyptian onions are being imported in pre-war quan- 
tities. Roumania is selling large quantities of grain to Italy and other European 
States. 

"All indications point to a marked recovery of European agriculture, with the 
possible exception of some of the Balkan States and Russia. It is probable, therefore, 
that after the 1920 harvest Europe will be back almost to pre-war conditions, so far 
as the domestic production of foodstuffs is concerned. 

"There need be no alarm as to the ability of the United States to hold its own in 
foreign trade in agricultural products. Even before the Great War the exports of 
breadstuffs were increasing each year. The progress of American agriculture during 
the war is but an indication of what can be done in the future, if prices of agricultural 
products are high enough to enable the American farmer to compete with other in- 
dustries for labor." 



MARKETING METHODS 473 

Distribution Terms. — Various terms are employed to designate the 
different agencies through whose hands goods pass on their waj^ from pro- 
ducer to consumer. 

Commission Men. — The commission man acquires no title to the 
goods, but sells them for the account of the owner, who is called the con- 
signor. The commission man usually attends to all the details of the sale, 
including the physical handling of the goods and the collection of pay- 
ment for them. In most cases the price is left to his discretion, and no 
confirmation of sale is necessary. 

The remuneration of the commission house is ordinarily an agreed 
percentage of the selling price. This varies from 2.5 to 10 per cent. 

The Broker. — Is essentially a representative of the seller or of the 
buyer. Does not do business in his own name. He furnishes his prin- 
cipal with information as to market conditions. Often attends to collec- 
tion of payments and negotiates the sale for a per cent of the sale — 2.5 
to 12 per cent of gross sales being usually charged as his commission. 
Brokers incline to deal in large quantities, in car lots or larger. 

The Wholesale Merchant. — Is a middle man who buys outright in 
order to sell again. His profits depend on the difference between the 
buying and selling prices. He therefore assumes the speculative 
risks of the market. Much of his selling is to jobbers. 

The Jobber. — The jobber is a merchant who deals directly with the 
retailer. 

The Speculator. — The speculator might be regarded as a variety of 
merchant since he buys to sell again. However, he does not aid in the 
movement of goods but depends for his profits on a change in market 
conditions. 

The terms which have just been defined relate to the form of dealing 
or method of doing business. There are a number of other terms that 
relate to the position of some of these dealers in the markets. 

The Country Collector.- — A dealer who visits farms, stores, etc., for 
the purpose of gathering a sufficient quantity of goods for shipment. 
Considerable amounts of supplies are handled in this way. Such a 
dealer is, however, of most importance to the small producer. 

The Shipper. — A dealer an important part of whose business is the 
sending of goods from the growing district to the wholesale markets. 
He usually has the equipment for proper packing of goods, a large enough 
business to permit of carload lots, familiarity with the business methods of 
transportation companies, market connections, or knowledge of mark- 
ets so that sales can readily be made. 

The Receiver. — An agency of this sort is one that devotes a large part 
of its time and attention to handling goods sent in by distant shippers. 
Such concerns are generally large and number the smaller wholesale 
dealers among their customers. 



474 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Exchanges. — There are two kinds of exchanges. One of these serves 
as a connection between local growers and dealers in distant markets; the 
other is an association of dealers in a market city which furnishes facili- 
ties for carrying on trade and serves its members in various other ways, 
but does not itself engage in trading. 

Packers. — Packers is a term used to designate almost any concern a 
large part of whose business is to put up food products in packages; 
canneries, dried fruit packing houses, etc. 

Distributors. — -The primary function of the distributor is to direct the 
shipment of products from the growing districts to the best markets. 
This is handled by associations, dealers, etc., but in all cases it requires a 
full knowledge of marketing conditions. 

Market Trend. — A dealer may handle goods on more than one basis, 
and in fact does so very frequently. The commission houses now trade 
to a greater extent as merchants than as commission men; indeed, the 
trend of business seems to be in this direction. 

One of the reasons for the decline in the commission business and 
for its unpopularity among dealers is the fact that the consignors are 
only too likely to suspect that they have been victims of unfair dealing 
when results are not satisfactory. Some of the dealers who voice this 
feeling frankly admit that the practices of the business have made grounds 
for such suspicions. 

Probably the chief reason for the development of the merchant at 
the expense of the commission man is that the former represents a more 
logical and economical organization in marketing. Most producers 
favor selling for cash f.o.b. point of shipment, for when this is done the 
matter is settled. They say that they prefer to avoid the risk attendant 
upon consigning to the commission man or upon shipping to the merchant 
subject to inspection at destination. However, the number of producers 
who send their products to the merchant subject to inspection is greater 
than that of the producers sending in on commission. 

Dealers who are doing business on both bases often refuse to buy, so 
that the producer still has the option of consigning on commission. 

The commission men claim that much of the talk against them is due 
to the ignorance of the shippers of marketing conditions. 

Where commission men buy on their own account goods consigned to 
them, there is great risk of their not paying the highest price to the 
consignor. They will buy on a rising market only. 

Again, if the goods are being sold from the car but not fast enough to 
avoid demurrage, then the dealer may himself purchase the remainder of 
the carload to save the expense of demurrage, and take the chance of sell- 
ing without a loss. If he does sell for a loss he usually buys the next lot 
at a price that makes up for it. However, such buying up of small lots 



MARKETING METHODS 475 

remaining makes it possible for the commission man to make remittance 
earlier to the consignor. 

Commission men as well as others state that one may not do both a 
commission business and a merchandise business properly, because if for 
example a dealer buys a consignment of lettuce and receives another 
consignment on commission, he naturally tries to sell his own first, while 
if any loss occurs it will be some of the consigned goods at the cost of the 
producer. 

How Farm Products are Marketed 

An understanding of how a given farm product is marketed is a first 
step in becoming acquainted with the marketing end of the farming 
business. This information should cover not only the various wholesale 
and retail methods but, as well, familiarity with consumers' demands, with 
transportation facilities, and with ordinary business procedure covering 
insurance, responsibility, and laws governing the distribution and disposal 
of farm products. Examples of influences are given below. 

Influence of Buyers. — The demand by buyers for a 150- to 225-lb. hog 
is traceable to a need for a porker which, when placed on the retail 
butcher's block, will cut up into sizes and shapes suitable for the retail 
trade; the desire for small packages of fruit in certain markets reflects a 
lack of storage room in the living quarters of consumers; insistence that 
wheat be free from sweet clover reflects the refusal by consumers to use 
flour possessing the characteristic pungent odor which so few as a dozen 
seeds of sweet clover in 100 lb. of wheat are capable of imparting. 

Influence of Transportation. — To be posted about transportation 
means studying the economy of routing by water as compared with rail, 
the use of motor trucks, the relative profitableness of different markets 
after deducting costs of transportation, handling charges, and spoilage. 

Influence of Legal Restrictions. — The legal aspect is well illustrated by 
municipal statutes governing the conditions under which market milk 
shall be produced, transported, and distributed; State laws defining 
market containers, especially those used in the handling of fresh fruit; 
laws controlling the shipping in of products from States known to be 
infested with dangerous fungi or insect pests or contagious animal 
diseases. 

Study the Important Products First. — Gaining acquaintance with 
marketing methods should begin with a study of those products of great- 
est importance to the investigator. There are so many farm products, 
and so wide a range in local practices, that individual study can best 
start with a limited number of products and of markets. 

Marketing Methods Vary. — Methods of marketing widely differing 
products for given localities are illustrated below. Their chief value lies 
in showing something of the scope that a study of markets should cover. 



476 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Examples of Marketing Methods. Marketing Live Stock via the Stockyards^^^ 
as an Exavipleof Live stock Marketing Methods.- — Stockyards are simply clearing houses 
for the transfer of live stock from producers to consumers. They are trade mechan- 
isms of great efficiency, and have become an important factor in the growth of the 
live stock industry in the United States. Under the stockyard system the producer 
loads his stock on cars, ships to the stockyards, and offers it for sale. Here it is 
purchased by some firm or butcher, and a bill of sale, with commission deducted, is 
sent to the shipper. 

Founding. — Prior to 1865, Chicago had several stock yards of minor importance 
and located in different sections of the city. In 1865, a certain John B. Sherman 
organized the Union Stock Yard and Transit Co., which purchased 320 acres in the 
city and opened the present Union Stock Yards, thus laying the basis for a greater 
live stock trade at Chicago. In 1876 the Union Stock Yards comprised 476 cattle 
yards, 675 covered hog and sheep pens, 375 chutes, 15 corn cribs, and 10 hay barns. 
The company owned and operated 20 miles of railway, put down several miles 
of macadamized streets and alleys, and installed a drainage system. The market 
could then accommodate at one time 20,000 cattle, 100,000 hogs, 15,000 sheep, and 
1,000 horses — in all 136,000. About 100 commission firms were then doing business. 

To-day the Union Stock Yard and Transit Co. receives, unloads, yards, feeds, 
waters, weighs, and delivers or reships live stock, but neither buys, sells nor slaughters. 
It is a great transportation and marketing corporation, which connects all the 26 
railroad systems entering Chicago with the Union Stock Yards, and provides 
unloading platforms, chutes, pens, buildings, and all necessary facilities for doing an 
immense daily business in handling live animals, but takes no part in the transactions 
of the market. The Chicago yards now occupy 500 acres, 450 of them paved, 25 
miles of streets, 300 of railways. It embraces 13,000 pens, 8,500 double-decked and 
covered, 725 chutes, 25,000 gates, 25 miles of watering trough, 450 commission and 
other offices. The water system has a reservoir holding 10,000,000 gal., and the 
pumps have a daily capacity of 8,000,000 gal. 

Separate accommodations are provided for each class of animal; sheep and hogs 
are kept in pens of two or more stories each, cattle occupy open pens holding from one 
to several carloads. These yards would hold at one time 75,000 cattle, 125,000 sheep, 
50,000 hogs, and 6,000 horses and mules. Fifty thousand people earn a living at stock 
yards and packing plants, and 250,000 of Chicago's population are more or less depend- 
ent on the live stock industry. When unloaded, the stock is taken in charge by some 
one of the many commission firms who sell to the packer, shipper, speculator, or feeder, 
and remit the proceeds to the consignor. Prices established on this leading market 
form the basis of values for live stock at other markets and throughout the country. 

Federal Inspection. — Federal inspection is rigid and includes live animals, carcasses, 
and packing house products. Nothing has done more to instill confidence in packers' 
meats than has the rigid government inspection. Packers' losses are frequently 
heavy due because of this inspection, mainly on account of tuberculosis. 

Cost. — Yardage at Chicago is 30^5 per head for cattle, 20^ for calves. Hay is 
$40 per ton. Commission charges for selling cattle at Chicago are as follows: 
Cattle in car lots, 70jzf per head; minimum per car $14, maximum $18. Calves in 
car lots 30 fi per head; single-deck cars, minimum $14, maximum $18; double-deck, 
minimum $20, maximum $23; less than 15 cattle in one car, $1 per head; less than 
28 calves in one car, 50^ per head. 

Marketing Hogs in Illinois^^^ as a Second Example of Live Stock Marketing 
Methods. — There are two distinct methods of marketing hogs in the State of Illinois — 
through local shippers and through cooperative live stock shipping associations. 

Under the former method — a practice that has prevailed over a long period — 
the local stock buyer goes direct to the farm and purchases the hogs. The hogs may 



MARKETING METHODS 477 

be weighed on the farm of the seller and pass directly into the hands of the buyer, or 
the seller may take the hogs to a local shipping point for weighing and delivery to the 
buyer. The seller severs all claims of ownership and absolves himself from all risks 
and responsibility upon receipt of payment. 

The buyer or shipper then consigns the hogs to a commission firm in the central 
market. The commission firm directs the sale of the shipment, receives all the money 
therefor, and pays the same to the shipper less its commission and all other expenses 
incurred. 

The disadvantages of this system of marketing from the producer's standpoint 
are that the price received for the hogs is oftentimes determined quite as much by 
the bargaining ability of the buyer as by the quality of the hogs, while the buyer 
purchases on as wide a margin as possible, to protect himself as far as he can against 
market fluctuations, shrinkage, etc. 

Obviously the buyer should be compensated for the risks he takes, but oftentimes 
the margin asked and frequently obtained is too wide. Evidences of this fact have 
prompted producers to seek remedial measures. And out of this situation has 
developed the second method of marketing hogs, namely, cooperative shipping 
associations. 

These organizations, as the name denotes, are cooperative in character and the 
membership is composed of producers who bind themselves together under a con- 
stitution and by-laws to do their own marketing in a collective way. Right to 
membership carries with it usually the payment of a small membership fee of from one 
to two dollars. 

The management of the association is under the control of a board of directors 
elected from the membership, which has the power to do all things necessary for the 
welfare of the association. The association elects a president, a vice-president, a 
secretary-treasurer, and a manager to look after the shipments. 

The most responsible positions in the association are those of secretary-treasurer 
and of manager. The secretary-treasurer keeps a record of all the proceedings of 
the association and of the board of directors. He acts as correspondent for the 
association in such matters as pertain to its business not otherwise assigned to the 
manager. As treasurer he keeps a record of all the membership dues, receives and 
holds all funds coming to the association and disburses or invests such money under 
direction of the board of directors. Records and accounts of the association are 
open at all times to the inspection of the members. 

The duties of the manager are rather heavy. All who desire to ship stock in the 
association report to the manager the kind of stock, number, and approximate weight 
of each. When the stock is ready for shipment the manager orders a car, notifies 
each party having stock listed, and designates the time and place for loading. He is 
at the yard on the day of shipment, receives the stock brought in by the farmers, 
weighs, marks, and loads the same on the car. The usual practice followed in marking 
is to use either paint or clippers or both, and as a rule the stock of the member having 
the largest shipment is not marked. 

In addition to the preceding duties, the manager directs the sale of all shipments, 
receives all moneys therefor, and pays the same to the shippers less his commission 
and all other expenses incurred in making the shipment. He furnishes a statement 
to each shipper, showing net weights, prices received, and expenses of shipment. 
He keeps on file a complete statement of settlement together with returns from the 
commission firms selling the live stock for the association. 

As compensat on for his services the manager usually receives 8^ per 100 lb. of 
stock sold by him, taking net weights at the central market as a basis of settlement. 
The amount of this compensation is determined by the board of directors and varies 
according to the plan of the association. There are two general types of these asso- 



478 FARM MANAGEMENT 

ciations, those organized on the community or local basis and those on the county 
basis. In case the local shipper makes the shipment, the county manager receives 
approximately one-fourth of the usual commission, or 2f! per 100 lb. of stock. 

There is an additional charge of from 1 to 2(!i per 100 lb. set aside as a sinking fund 
to cover office and overhead expense; also another 3 to 5^ as insurance against loss of 
animals either crippled or killed in shipment. The amounts of these additional 
charges may be lowered or raised at the discretion of the board of directors. 

The other expenses, such as commission for selling, freight, yardage, etc. are pro- 
rated among the shippers. This expense, of course, varies with distance to market, 
etc., but in this state usually runs from 50 to 75 (^ per 100 lb. 

This system of marketing narrows the margin between market price and farm price 
and insures the producer a larger share of the consumer's dollar. It is growing 
rapidly in popularity and gives promise of replacing the other system altogether. 

Marketing Corn in the Corn Belt as an Example of Field Crop Marketing Methods.^^" 
When the corn is first husked it is placed in slatted cribs. The corn at husking time 
ordinarily contains a rather high per cent of moisture and must have good ventilation 
in order that it may dry out. 

The best type of slatted crib is commonly known as the double crib. That is, 
the cribs are built in pairs, usually about 10 ft. wide, with a driveway 8 or 10 ft. 
wide between them. The most common length is 32 ft., and they are ordinarily 
10 ft. high from sill to eaves. 

If 21.^ cu. ft. of space is allowed per bushel, which is about right for corn before it 
is settled, then a pair of such cribs will hold approximately 2,500 bu. This is sufficient 
crib space for the average quarter-section farm. If there is a surplus of corn, it is 
piled on the ground for immediate use. Sometimes such piles are enclosed with woven 
wire or slat fencing. The fact that they are uncovered makes little difference during 
the winter months, as most of the snow will blow off. They should, however, be 
emptied before the spring rains come. 

The major portion of the surplus corn is marketed during the winter months. It 
is run directly from the sheller into a box wagon, hauled to the local elevator, and 
dumped. Some of the country elevators make some effort to clean any surplus of 
chaff and dust from the corn before sending into the terminal markets. From the 
elevator, the corn is run directly into a box car and shipped to the terminals, as Kan- 
sas City or Omaha. 

Many farmers use cooperative local elevators. By "cooperative" is meant that 
the stock holders are limited to one vote per man or as near to that as State 
Constitutions permit, that interest on stock is Hmited to current interest rate, and 
that the earnings of the company are paid out as patronage dividends to the men 
who furnish the grain that makes the profit possible. 

All grain is bought outright by the elevator company at a reasonable margin and 
shipped to the terminal. The farmers use their own judgment as to the time when 
each will sell his grain. The price paid is of course regulated by the terminal market 
price. 

In addition to the cooperative elevatons there are many line elevators, that is, 
elevators operated along some line of railroad and owned either by some large company 
having central offices in one of the terminal markets, or by individuals. 

Marketing North Dakota Wheat^^^ as a Second Example of Field Crop Marketing 
Methods. — The North Dakota farmer has several channels for marketing wheat. The 
largest amount of wheat is marketed at the local mill, because (a) the mill offers 1^ 
more per bushel when sold in 500 bu. lots, (6) the mill does not figure dockage and 
grade as closely as do many elevators, since the average grade of wheat grown in that 
region is superior in milling qualities to that of the United States as a whole, and (c) 
the local mill frequently pays a few cents premium on extra good grades. 



MARKETING METHODS 479 

The cooperative elevators and the privately owned elevators receive a considerable 
amount of wheat, especially in years when the grade of wheat is poor. At other times 
wheat is exchanged at the cooperative elevator for coal, since the elevator is often the 
principal coal distributing agency of the district. 

The local elevators have several routes of marketing wheat. A great deal is 
marketed at local mills, when there is but a limited amount of grain coming in and 
at times when the terminal markets are filled. 

Grain shipped out all goes to the markets at Minneapolis, Duluth, or Superior. 
It makes no essential difference since the freight is the same and their market prices 
usually range pretty nearly even. Minneapolis receives the bulk of the shipments 
of hard wheats, probably due to the momentum of habit because it is the largest 
market. Duluth receives the bulk of the durum wheats, which are mostly shipped 
by way of the Great Lakes to Spain or Italy to be used in the manufacture of macaroni. 
Minneapolis at times has durum quotations above those of Duluth, but this affects 
only the highest grades of durum wheat which are in demand for the manufacture 
of cereal breakfast foods by the Minneapolis manufacturers. This deceives a good 
many inexperienced shippers, so that the Minneapolis market receives some criticism 
not really deserved. 

The grading of grain at the local elevators is a comparatively simple process on 
account of the small quantities in which it is brought. Each load is sampled before 
it is dumped. The sampling is done either by means of a probe or by catching samples 
in a pan while it is dumped. The sample is then cleaned by a small machine and the 
dockage determined. A standard measure of the clean grain is then weighed and the 
test weight per bushel determined. 

At the terminal markets a much different system is used on account of the volume 
of business and the need for much more scientific work. The samples are taken by a 
sampler at a point some distance from the terminal market. The sampler is a govern- 
ment official who has the right to break the seal of the car. A sample is made up 
by taking small quantities of grain from diiferent parts of the car and mixing these into 
a composite from which a small representative amount is drawn and expressed into 
the terminal market. The car is then resealed and sent on its way. The sample 
thus arrives ahead of the car. The sample is graded and usually sold even before the 
car is in the yards. This saves a good deal of time and congestion at the terminal 
market as the car can be immediately dumped or shipped on to some other point of 
consignment. 

The sample on arriving is taken to a commission firm, and placed in a pan along- 
side of others on a long table. Each pan contains a card bearing the name of the 
shipper and the number of the car, and later the grade is placed upon it. This room 
is always lighted by windows on the north side, as direct sunHght affects determination 
of color, etc. The inspector, who is a government official and is not interested in the 
welfare of either buyer or shipper, then comes along and grades the grain. The buyers 
are then permitted to inspect the samples and make their bids, which are handled by 
the commission men. Until the federal inspection was begun, buying was done alto- 
gether on sample, the buyers basing their bids entirely upon their own judgment as to 
the quality of the different samples. During the war, with the set prices, there was 
always a variation of a few cents on the different grades, due to the differences in 
milhng quahties which the grading system is finely graduated enough to cover. 
Hence, the present system, although it prevents the payment of less than the set 
price according to grade set by the inspector, can not prevent the paying of premiums 
on the various grades. The trade will probably eventually go back to the old buying- 
on-sample method, since it is just as fair; for under this method the grain always 
stands on its own merits, while the grading, being in the hands of several experienced 
buyers and handlers, is less liable to error than under inspection by one man no matter 
how efficient he is. 



480 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



The cost of marketing wheat is very difficult to calculate definitely, since the 
variations for different times and localities are so great. The following table will 
show the total spread in marketing wheat from Valley City, North Dakota, to Minne- 
apolis, Minnesota, giving the various charges and commissions throughout the 
process. It was taken from market prices on Feb. 25, 1919, and statistics received 
from J. H. Thompson, manager of the Farmers' Cooperative Elevator at Valley 
City. 

Cost of Marketing Wheat per Bushel 



Price at 
Valley City 


Freight 


Weighing 


Inspection 


Com- 
mission 


Margin at 

local 
elevator 


Prices at 
Minne- 
apolis 


.$2.09 


$0 . 102 


$0.01 


$0.01 


$0.01.5 


$0,018 


$2,235 



If can be seen from the foregoing table that the total spread from Valley City 
to Minneapolis is 14.5 ff. 

Marketing California Oranges as an Example of Fruit Marketing Methods. — ■ 
Proper marketing of citrus fruit begins with the picking. Oranges are carefully 
picked into a bag, carried by a broad strap over the shoulder. When filled, these 
bags, opening at the bottom to permit dumping without bruising, are gently emptied 
into 80-lb. lug boxes and these are stacked until a shipment is ready for delivery to a 
packing house. Care in handling is rigidly enforced, since bruises and abrasions will 
result in decay even from such apparently minor causes as cuts by picking clippers, 
stem punctures, fingernail scratches, gravel dents, or holes made by nails in boxes or by 
tree thorns. 

At the packing house the fruit is weighed in and stacked, and the record credited 
to the grower. The fruit is cleaned of dust by passing through a series of fast revolving 
roller brushes, either with a spray of water directed upon the fruit or else dry cleaned. 
If smut is present, it is washed off by hand and the fruit then dried on racks, or else 
run through an air-blast drier. 

Sorting follows cleaning, sizes being automatically determined by mechanical 
graders, while culls, off colored, irregular shaped, rough, or blemished fruit, are re- 
moved by expert sorters. The marketable grades — usually Fancy, Choice, and Stand- 
ard — are then weighed on automatic machines where the proper proportion of each 
grade is credited to the owner. From here on the grower's identity is lost as the fruit 
now enters a general pool. Storage bins receive the fruit until packing commences. 
Packing is done by hand, into standard boxes having outside measurements of 
12 by 12 by 26 in., divided by a partition into two parts, holding (according to grade) 
from 96 to 360 fruits, or usually 200 to 250, and weighing when packed about 78 
lb. The boxes are packed over full so that it is necessary to force on the cover. A 
fancy label is then added to the end of the box, together with stencilled data giving 
variety, size of fruit, and packer's number. For shipping by freight the boxes are 
placed on end, two deep, seven tiers wide and 33 tiers long, making 642 boxes in a 
standard car. The car is then-precooled by cold air, iced, taken to a central assembling 
point where trainloads are made up, and started for market. In cold weather the 
cars are lined with heavy paper prior to loading, and in hot weather re-iced en route 
if this becomes necessary. 

Citrus growers avail themselves of three methods of marketing. Of the total 
lemon and orange output, 5 per cent is sold by independent methods of marketing by 
large growers able to put up packing houses of their own and sell according to their 



MARKETING METHODS 481 

own ideas. About 15 per cent is sold directly to retail merchants, hotels, speculators, 
etc. The remaining 82 per cent is sold by associations of growers organized for mutual 
benefit. In California, by far the most important channel for citrus distribution is 
the association known as the California Fruit Growers' Exchange, organized in 
1895 to establish and maintain distributing and marketing facilities. This single 
agency handles 62 per cent of the total citrus output. 

Thus, California growers utilizing present marketing facilities, have at hand the 
advantages of stabilized prices, standard pack, increased demand, and nearly uniform 
supply, the most satisfactory of modern transportation facilities, and an extraordi- 
narily wide knowledge of market conditions. 

Growers primarily interested in production usually leave their marketing to a 
local exchange which, operating first through the district exchange and finally through 
the central exchange (i.e., the California Fruit Grower's Exchange), takes charge 
not only of finding markets, shipping, selling, collecting, making returns, but also, 
if requested, will assume the responsibility of picking the grower's fruit and of acting 
as buying agent for such supplies as sprays, fertilizers, fumigating materials, etc. 

Marketing Agencies 

Changing conditions bring new methods and means of marketing. 
Sometimes the change is in hne with federal and state measures to assist 
farmers in the distribution of their products, as by the outright purchase 
of certain staples {i.e., wheat, wool), by the establishing of markets, by 
extension of financial backing to reduce the need of hasty selling, or by 
spreading information concerning market conditions. Other times the 
change is traceable to farmers organizing for mutual benefit, or to their 
keeping more regularly in touch with market conditions, or to a change 
in kinds and amounts of production, or to a change in consumers' demands 
or to the introduction of substitutes (as coconut oil for butterfat). 

Local and new conditions result in so many agencies for the market- 
ing of farm products that a general presentation of what is available 
is valuable more to point out what to look for rather than for its 
completeness. 

Ways of Marketing. — One or more of the agencies available to the 
individual producer are (1) commission men or dealers in market centers, 
to whom farmers can ship consignments direct; (2) itinerant representa- 
tives, on the one hand, of city dealers and commission men, who buy 
outright, usually on commission themselves, and ship on to their prin- 
cipals, and, on the other hand, local buyers who either give their whole 
time to the business — as for example, warehousemen, storekeepers, 
butchers, etc. — make buying from farmers a side issue; (3) farmers* 
markets — often being the so-called "free" or municipal markets, and 
usually being located in centers of population — where farmers can 
take their goods at stated hours to reserved locations and there retail 
them direct to consumers; (4) the main centers where farmers can per- 
sonally deliver or dispose of their products to wholesale dealers for resale, 
or to wholesale buyers; (5) farmers' marketing associations supported by 
the producers and manned by officials answerable to the farmers. Some 

31 



482 FARM MANAGEMENT 

of the associations are founded on the interest held in common by pro- 
ducers of a specialized product — e.g., apples, hops, walnuts, prunes, 
alfalfa hay, dairy products, cotton — while others have their inception 
in the Farm Bureau or in the sharing by producers of a feeling of need 
for mutual support and aid. To continue the list, there are: (6) parcel 
post method of marketing direct to consumer; (7) intermediary agencies 
primarily engaged in putting unfinished farm products into shape for 
first sales by farmers, such as the cotton gins that separate lint from seed 
and bales for shipment, the fruit packing houses, the grain and bean 
cleaners, the wool scourers, the tanners (who may also be in a position 
to consummate sales of products put in shape for the farmer) ; (8) direct 
sales by and between farmers, as hay to dairymen, grain to poultrymen, 
horse feeds to t.ruck gardeners and orchardmen, select seed to growers, 
pure bred stock to stockmen; (9) farm sales by farmers to consumers 
from stands erected along the road, or advertising for buyers, or casual 
inquiries of travelers, or creating a demand on the part of regular cus- 
tomers — this method being confined very largely to sale of poultry prod- 
ucts, fruits, nuts, vegetables, and flowers, with an occasional exception 
in the cases of dairy products, meats, firewood, and bread or other 
kitchen products; (10) developing of individually owned or controlled 
ways of preparing farm products for sale to the ultimate consumer 
such as the packing of fruits in attractive and practical containers, 
the putting up of honey in combs or jars for immediate sale, or more 
elaborate means like establishing abattoirs, butcher shops, and butter 
and egg stalls or stores in the local market; (11) advance sale of products 
to be grown under contract for the buyer, as in raising of beets or cane 
for a sugar mill, growing seed crops for seedsmen, producing eggs for 
hatcheries, incubating chicks for poultry-men, raising fruit or vegetables 
for canneries, driers, and packing houses, planting long-staple cotton for 
tire manufacturers; (12) sales to local stores — grocery, meat shop, soda 
fountain, etc. 

Choosing the Marketing Method. — Experience in marketing through 
the various agencies backed by adequate information and intelligent 
analysis of the advantages of and objections to the different methods 
available, is about the only way to work out a final choice. Some of the 
elements helping to a decision must rest on findings concerning (1) 
the degree of honesty of local or remote buyers, (2) the extent of check 
upon consignments to brokers or commission men, (3) the strength of 
farmers' marketing organizations, (4) the shrewdness, business ability, 
and capacity of the producer, (5) the time and attention that the producer 
can give to the marketing end. 

Farmers who are deficient in marketing knowledge or are easily 
influenced by the wiles of canny buyers, who lack the time to market 
properly, or who in any way feel a sense of incompetency in marketing, 



MARKETING METHODS 



483 



had better select an established firm of good reputation, or rely upon a 
local representative possessing a name for fair dealing, or join a farmers' 
association, and so permit someone else to carry the responsibility of 
disposing of the product. 

Farmers who have the time and qualifications to insure success in 
marketing will be rewarded by a part of the profits incident to the selling 
of their products, and will find much to interest them in carrying their 
output as far as possible on the way to the ultimate consumer. 

The relative desirability of each of the various marketing methods 
in any community will depend on its (1) reliability, (2) facilities for caring 
for and disposing of products, (3) accessibihty, (4) capacity for making 
cash advance or speedy returns, (5) marketing standards, gauged from 
the viewpoints of individual producer. 

Inventory Method of Testing Marketing Agencies. — Using the inven- 
tory method of charting the advantages and objections of three or four 
different methods, as viewed by the producer, and presenting them merely 
for illustrative purposes, since local conditions must materially affect 
general statements, we find: 



Local 

Advantages 
Close contact with purchaser 
Usually several buyers available, which creates 

competition. 
Product can be kept on the farm if the price 

offered is not acceptable. 
No expense for freight or commissions and other 

similar items if no sale is made. 
Buyer takes risk of a market break. 
Provides an idea of what market demands and 

how prices are going. 
Closer culling at source means fewer rejections and 

discounts. 



Buyers 

Objections 

Reputation for close and sometimes dishonest deal- 
ing. 

Question as to financial standing. 

Possibility of bu.yers' limiting prices by mutual 
agreement among themselves. 

Shyness of buyers to bid on a falling market. 

Insistence of buyers sometimes a considerable 
bother to producer before product is ready if 
prices are climbing. 

Loss of increased price if the market strengthens 
while product is en route. 



Municipal or Free Markets 



Advantages 
Direct contact with consumers. 
Somewhat higher prices obtainable. 
An outlet for surplus product. 

A way to utilize time to advantage which other- 
wise might be wasted. 



Objections 

Necessity of being located near large centers of 

population. 
Time and expense involved in getting to and from 

market and in retailing goods. 
Equipment needed for small sales, e.g., scales, bags, 

paper, twine. 
Necessity of getting license, often involving small 

fee. 
Time limits when markets are open. 
Some customers unpleasant to serve. 
Spoilage during hot weather. * 

Sacrifice sales when competition is heavy. 
Difficulty of getting to market when roads are 

heavy. 



Parcel Post 



Advantages 
Cheap method of transporting. 
Top prices to the producer. 
Ready market for either a steady output 

unexpected surplus. 
Appreciation of buyers. 
Clean method of handling. 
Freedom from bother with middleman. 



Objections 
Trouble in working up a market and getting orders. 
Lack of uniformity in quantity and qualit.v of 

product during different seasons resulting in an 

over-supply or under-supply at times and so 

necessititing explanation to buyers. 
Time and energy required to obtain packages, 

prepare for shipping, and deliver when wanted. 
Amount of correspondence entailed. 
Necessity of maintaining high standards in all 

products put out. 
Confined to a relatively small amount of farm 

products, e.g., eggs, butter, fruit, nuts, hence of 

liuiitecj value, 



484 



FARM MANAGEMENT 





Fig. 91. — Typical municipal free market where farmers sell direct to townspeople, 

Fresno, California. 



MARKETING METHODS 485 

Farmers' Marketing Associations 

Advantages Objections 

Relegation of marketing duties to men directly Delay in making final returns to farmers. 

responsible to the producer. Difficulty in getting unselfish, unbiased support 

Wholesale handling of products gives access to from producers. 

more and larger markets and permits diversion Difficult to find good managers. 

of carload lots en route. Attempts by independents to man the organization 

Reduction in operating expense because of elimina- and to kill off young organizations. 

tion of duplication, volume of business, capacity Complete or partial failure mutually to agree con- 
loading of cars, etc. cerning policies between the working members 

Opportunity to purchase supplies in wholesale and the directors. 

quantities through same organization, thus Danger of inability (1) to secure large enough 
affecting substantial savings. percentage of the output to insure sufficient 

Ability to provide better facilities for the care of control, (2) to meet financial obligations on 
products, such as packing houses, warehouses. time, (3) obtain loyalty from employees, '^4) to 

Financing of producers needing temporary help. hold farmers in line. 

Checking up on quality of output, e.g., sugar beets, 
wheat, wool; and on weights and measurements. 

Grading and branding of products to conform to 
more uniform standards. 

Relieving the grower of certain responsibilities 
as of obtaining help in periods of stress and 
supplying efficient equipment (sprayers, har- 
vesters, etc.). Obtaining of community backing, 
with its attendant moral, personal and financial 
support. 

Employment of expert salesmen possessing or 
able to establish reputation. 

Higher net returns. 

Relief from marketing responsibilities, thus per- 
mitting closer attention to farm operations. 

Less care and worry. 

Extension of markets by combined advertising. 

Similar Tests of Other Agencies. — Setting forth the advantages of and 
objections to other marketing agencies or methods in the same way, to 
reflect local conditions and the individual producer's point of view, will 
help substantially to crystallize one's ideas concerning the relative desira- 
bility of each available outlet for one's products. 

Present System of Marketing Is Sound. — In the writer's opinion, the 
present system of marketing farm products is essentially sound. It 
doesn't need to be torn all to pieces because in certain and perhaps 
even in numerous instances, there may be, and often is, ample room to im- 
prove details. An apparent objection to the present system is sometimes 
advanced to the effect that there is an enormous number of middlemen, 
and yet study is likely to show that the system, even though complicated, 
is actually required because there is a place for specialization in handling 
farm products on account of producers' needs and consumers' demands. 
Especially should beginners in marketing be careful not to put too much 
faith in cooperative associations, since in many instances the handling 
of marketing details by producers means simply a transferring of the 
expense of marketing rather than its elimination. Such procedure may 
under present conditions effect substantial savings and for this, reason 
alone be entirely justified. In the long run any increased returns are 
equivalent to the net profits of former agencies which have been replaced, 
so that cooperative marketing by producers does not operate to eliminate 
all costs . of distributing farm products. There are enough instances 
where cooperation has resulted in bettering ways of handling and stand- 
ardization, and of actual saving, to warrant serious consideration and 
possible use of the method wherever conditions are favorable for 
associations. 



486 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Visiting the Markets 

As much information as possible should be collected concerning the 
channels through which one's goods pass on their way to market, whether 
the crops be non-perishable staples like grain or hay or stock or the more 
perishable such as truck, fresh fruits, dairy and poultry products. For 
instance, it is good information to know how the grain exchanges are 
conducted, how grading is done, what rules govern Board members, how 
samples are shown, how quotations are determined, and to find out the 
place of "futures" and the bad features of manipulation of the market. 




Fig. 92.— Center Market— Washington, D. C. 



It is well worth while for the producer of butter, cheese, or eggs to visit 
personally his nearest Dairy Exchange, see it in action, and learn how 
it functions. It is not only worth while but even vital to visit the 
markets to which one is shipping perishable goods and is relying upon a 
commission man or broker to look out for the selling end. Altogether 
too few producers make it their business to visit their salesmen regularly 
and evince interest in the disposal of products. 

Value of Visiting the Markets. Selecting a Representative. — From 
such a visit can come a better idea as to what firm shall be selected to act 
as local representative. If one sees goods bearing the name of shippers, 
known to be hardheaded and conservative, handled by a certain firm, it 
stamps that firm with a certain degree of reliability. If one finds that a 
firm has been in business for many years and that its books carry names 



MARKETING METHODS 487 

of clients who have dealt with it continuously for many years, one is 
safe in assuming that reasonably satisfactory service has been rendered. 
Inquiry, carefully and properly conducted, will bring to light the reputa- 
tion and standing of any given firm in the community. 

Studying Local Demands.— FYQ(\uQni visits, well timed to see the 
markets when busiest, aid in showing the producer what the local demand 
calls for in the way of quality. A keen observer will soon find out whom 
the buyers represent when picking up stuff for push-cart or peddler trade, 
for retail stores in the poorer sections, for the better class of stores, restau- 
rants, and hotels. A knowledge of quality based on wholesale market 
receipts is far more valuable than that based on information limited to 
what one's community or neighbors are doing. 

Studying Facilities. — The visitor can learn how goods are received 
and delivered. He will see for himself the enormous investment in ware- 
house and shipping facilities, delivery wagons, and get a idea of the amount 
of capital required to carry growers. He can obtain data regarding com- 
missions charged. He can find out to whom the successful growers are 
shipping. He can note the variations in packages, the packages most 
in demand, and those which best stand transportation and handling. 
He can determine what the market demands in quality and quantity; 
what constitutes over-ripeness or under-ripeness at the time of reaching 
the market; what constitutes good packing. He can size up the possi- 
bility of replacing distributing agencies 

Effect of Quality. — A trip through a fruit packing house or a cannery 
shows the influence of quality of crop on prices offered. The presence 
of unsorted sizes, of speckled, off color, immature, or overmature fruit, 
adds much to the hard work of grading, sorting, and packing. Such fruit 
is worth less. 

Presence of burs, stones, weed seeds and the like, which must be 
hand-picked from peas or beans for canning, adds to costs and thus 
decreases the value of the product as purchased from the grower. 

The producer visiting the market will find that the farmer's stuff is 
not always sent in in perfect condition. Deceit in packing is still preva- 
lent. Time and time again dealers report such conditions as wilted 
lettuce, woody carrots, wormy potatoes, small scrubby product in the 
middle of a package with No. 1 stuff in sight, raised bottoms to berry boxes, 
nicely faced packages with poor fruit beneath, and scantily filled packages. 

Shipping Receptacles. — Some receptacles are not packed tightly 
enough to ship well; others are packed scantily. Some shippers appar- 
ently reason that twelve baskets of peaches two-thirds full will sell better 
and for more money than eight well filled. And this in spite of the fact 
that when poor stuff goes out both commission man and farmer lose 
money. The farmer is ultimately paid by the consumer — not by the 
commission man. A poor grade of fruit or other product not satisfactory 



488 FARM MANAGEMENT 

to the consumer, or at a price too high, will partially or totally destroy a 
market, and then the farmer's returns are indicated in red ink. 

Deceit in Quality or Quantity. — Anyone who fails to put forth good 
produce hurts the trade. If one goes on the assumption that the con- 
sumer must buy, he fools himself. The consumer can find a way out by 
purchasing brands of canned fruits and vegetables which experience has 
taught him are put up with scrupulous care into uniform packages, or he 
will buy in small quantities where every item going into his purchase can 
be inspected. And he will substitute. If he is disappointed in peaches 
he'll turn to some other fruit; if in new peas, he may go back to corned 
beef and cabbage. And lastly, the housewife, rather than serve fresh 
fruit, will buy second rate stuff to be made into puddings, pies, and 
desserts. 

Canners are Competitors in Open Markets. — The work of the canners is 
worthy of close study by farmers who desire to improve their marketing 
methods. The use of canned vegetables and fruits has progressed not 
alone because they are not perishable and are more easily portable, but 
rather because the purchaser knows he can count on uniform quality, 
at least in standard brands. Canned stuff is not as attractive as fresh, 
but there is a good deal of satisfaction in knowing that one can of toma- 
toes will be like another, that the percentage of sirup will be the same 
in each can of peaches of the same brand. The canneries deserve a lot 
of credit for the far-sighted wisdom that has resulted in this pohcy. They 
are today important competitors of the farmer. Those who buy in the 
open market are too familiar with the varying differences to be found in 
the usual run of farmers' fresh goods. Better standardization is impor- 
tant if the fresh market is to be maintained. 

Personal Marketing hy Farmers. — Whenever a farmer or producer, as 
a result of his inquiries, contemplates directly marketing his own prod- 
ucts or plans to give considerable time to supervising distribution of his 
output, he will do well to compare the expenses, in time and money, of 
doing this work with the additional returns to be expected. Only in- 
creased returns will meet — and thus justify — increased selling costs. 

Few Growers Visit Their Markets. — Far too few growers and pro- 
ducers recognize the full value of first hand information concerning the 
demands of their markets and the necessity of being constantly in close 
touch with the selling agents located at these points. One big commission 
house estimates that only 1 in 40 of their shippers ever visits them, and 
the visits of those who come average not more than one a year. Another 
firm doing $150,000 annual business estimates that not over 10 of their 
clients call during the year. Complaints of taking advantage of shippers 
would certainly be reduced in frequency if shippers would, when they 
are able, give closer personal attention to their selling agencies. 



MARKETING METHODS 489 

Influence of Weather Upon Sales. — A producer visiting his market 
can also study the effect of weather changes upon purchasing and upon 
the quality of his goods. He will find that local changes in \yeather con- 
ditions are often responsible for increase or decrease in sales of fresh 
products. The average middle class, because of its vast buying powers, 
really regulates the market, rather than the excessively rich who pay no 
attention to prices, or if the very poor who are governed by their lack of 
means. The tastes of this huge buying public are largely determined 
by weather conditions. For instance, during cold weather, the tendency 
is to a greater demand for carrots, beets, parsnips, and other substantial 
vegetables, rather than toward fruits. Three or four days of hot weather 
will decrease the demand for vegetables and markedly increase the 
call for watermelons, cantaloupes, peaches, and other fruits. The 
same thing holds well of meats. During cold weather pork, beef, and 
mutton are much in demand, while during warm weather the sales of 
meats will fall off, to be replaced with fish and fowl. A sudden change 
in the weather will therefore influence returns to farmers as reflecting 
buyers' tastes. Returns will be further affected for the more perish- 
able fruits and vegetables sent during hot weather due to greater 
amount of spoilage. Two or three days of warm weather with fruit 
displayed in stalls or in boxes, will greatly increase the percentage of 
spoiling, hence high prices may be secured but not necessarily high 
total returns to the farmer. 

Packages and Containers Vary.- — Different markets desire different 
styles of packages. A producer shipping apples to Boston or New York 
will find the barrel in favor, while apples shipped to San Francisco or 
Los Angeles are desired in the standard apple box of the Pacific Coast, a 
box having outside dimensions 10 by 11 by 21 inches and constructed of 
^-inch stuff for ends, and 3^^-inch for sides, top, and bottom. 

A visit to any market will show a multitude of types of package. 
One will see common styles and sizes from many sections, e.gr., the Georgia 
peach basket, the Oregon apple box, the Florida orange box, the Louisi- 
ana rice sack, the New York apple barrel, the New England butter 
firkin, and the grain sack of the West. These will vie with various 
boxes, baskets, hampers, crates, odd tubs, and barrels of different kinds, 
for local or distance shipments of celery, cauliflower, lettuce, strawberries, 
cantaloupes, fresh peaches, pears, apples, grapes, and so on down the list 
of such containers of farm produce as the Baltimore vegetable box, the 
bushel and 2-bu. hamper of the south, the 40-, 50-, or 60-lb. lugbox of the 
Pacific Coast, the slatted vegetable barrel of the south, and various 
more or less locallj^ used containers — there are almost as many sorts as 
there are of farm products and farming districts. The variation in size is 
also interesting. The hampers of the south and the barrels of New 
England are especially variable, being of many sizes. Then there are the 



490 



FARM MANAGEMENT 






-Jit/ 






' r\ \ti lint 11-'**^ ■-*■- 






Fig. 93. — Types of containers for farm products. 

1. Florida cantaloupe and melon crate. 5. Celery crate. 

2. Asparagus crate. 6. 6 basket Georgia crate. 

3. 13-2 bushel lettuce hamper. 7. Citrus fruit crate. 

4. Basket vegetable barrel. 8. Standard bushel crate. 
From Country Gentleman, issue of Jan, 25, 1919. 



MARKETING METHODS 



491 



containers doing secondary duty as market packages, such as cement, 
flour, and sugar barrels reused to ship farm products. The prevaihng 
package for each farm product is the outcome of conditions or kind of 
transportation, length of haul, roughness of handling, available materials 
for making, and custom. 

Western markets incline largely to the rectangular container — to 
lugboxes, fruit crates, vegetable boxes, poultry crates; Eastern markets 
admit many barrels of odd sizes, hampers, and various sorts of boxes; 
the Southern markets are more noticeable for the frail fruit packages 
and the large number of baskets and hampers made of splints. 

Studying Types of Containers. — Study of market packages shows (a) 
containers shipped in from a distance, with methods of packing and grades 
of product, (6) local packages, with methods of preparing for shipment, 
and quality of output. Data concerning shipments from outside territory 
are largely matters of information and for possible use by the investigator. 
The data covering shipments in competition with one's own products 
serve to show what is being done and to indicate what changes may be 
instituted to advantage. 

Examples of Market Containers and Packages.^ — Types and sizes 
of market containers and packages which are more or less common are: 



Name of container 


Used mostly for 


Description 


Dimensions 


Baltimore vegetable 


Vegetables 




A stoutly made wooden box. 


12 by 18 in. on top; 9 by 14 


box 






of 1-in. material, with 
slanting sides 


in. on bottom, with 12-in. 
sides 


Pepper and egg- 


Peppers and 


egg- 


Rectangular box with 5 slats 


111-2 by 14 by 22 in. inside 


plant crate 


plants 




on sides, solid ends top and 
bottom, reinforced with 
cross slats, heavily nailed 


measure containing 3,465 
cu. in. 


Florida melon crate 


Cantaloupes 


and 


A slatted rectangular box. 


12 by 12 by 22 in. inside 




melons 




3 slides on sides, top and 
bottom with solid ends 


measure; containing 3,168 
cu. in. 


One and one-half 


Lettuce and 


other 


A round hamper of ?-8-in. slat 


Diameter of top 16}^ in., of 


bushel hamper 


vegetables 




construction, larger on top 
than on base, filled with 
solid bottom 


bottom 9 in., vertical depth 
253-2 in-, all inside measure- 
ments; capacity 48 dry 
quarts 


Celery crate 


Celery 




A rectangular box of slatted 
sides top and bottom with 
either slatted or solid ends. 


10 by 20 by 22 in. inside 
measurements, containing 
4,400 cu. in. 


Citrus crate 


Oranges, lemons, 


A rectangular box of slatted 


12 by 12 by 24 in., or 11^ by 




grape fruit 




sides, top and bottom with 
solid ends, and one cross- 
partition 


llj.^ by 25 in. 


Standard bushel 


Vegetables 




A rectangular box of triple 


12 by 12 by 15 in. inside 


crate 






slatted top, sides, and 
bottom, with solid ends, 
reinforced with battens 
along edges of ends 


measure capacity 2,160 
cu. in. 



492 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Name of container 


Used mostly for 


Description Dimensions 


Bushel basket 


Vegetables 


A rounded basket made of 
M-in. slats; open on top 


16 in. across top, 10 in. across 
bottom, 18-in. tall 


Barrel 


Apples 


A closely built barrel of 
fitted staves and strength- 
ened with hoops, having 
solid round top and bottom 


Variable, although usually 
18 in. across top, and 30 in. 
high 




Barley sack 


Onions , potatoes, 
grain, turnips, car- 
rots, etc. 


Brown woven jute, averag- 
ing about 1 lb. in weight 


21 by 35 in. or 21 by 36 in. 


Alameda lug 


Unpacked fruit and 
vegetables 


A rectangular box, open top, 
solid sides, bottom and 
ends built of 1-in. stuff for 
ends, balance 3'2-in. net 
contents 40 to 50 lb., weight 
8 1b. 


6J'2 by 14 by 21 in. outside 
measure 


River lug 


Unpacked fruit and 
vegetables 


Same as lug, except net con- 
tents averages 60 to 70 lb., 
weight 10 lb. 


81.^ by 14 by 22 in. outside 
measure 


Crate or barrel crate 


Cabbage and other 
vegetables 


A rectangular box of }'i by 4- 
in. slats, 3 on a side and 2 on 
top and bottom, with either 
solid or slatted ends across 
partition divides the box 
into two compartments 


12 by 18 by 33 in. inside 
measure; containing 7,128 
cu. in. 


Asparagus crate 


Asparagus 


A rectangular box with solid 
ends and cross partition, 
solid bottom, two slats on 
top and two on each side, 
the side slats consisting of 
one wide slat at base and 
one narrow slat near top 


IQjri in. long, 11 in. high, 
103-^ in. wide on bottom and 
9>2 in. wide at top; contain- 
ing 2,145 cu. in. 


Basket vegetable 
barrel 


Vegetable, 


Made of crossed slats, inter- 
woven and reinforced with 

staves 


Diameter of heads 17>2 in. 
distance between heads 26 
in.; length of stave 28}'2 in.; 
circumference of bulge 64 in. 
outside; contents 7,056 cu. 
in. 


Six basket crate; 
Georgia Carrier 


Fruits, tomatoes 
and similar perish- 
able vegetables 


A rectangular box of slatted 
sides top and bottom, solid 
ends, containing six four- 
quart baskets 


10 by 113-2 by 22 in.; capacity 
24 qt. 


Lettuce crate 


Lettuce 


A rectangular box, of three 
slats on top, sides, and 
bottom, solid ends all re- 
inforced with strips 


71.^ by 18 by 22 in. inside 
measure; capacity 2,970 cu. 
in. 


Potato sack 


Potatoes 


Loosely woven coarse jute, 
average weight 1 to 2 lb., 
gross weight filled 110 to 
124 lb. 


24 by 33 in. 



MARKETING METHODS 



493 



Name of container Used mostly for Description 


Dimensions 


Berry chest 


Strawberries, lasp- 
berries, blackber- 
ries, dewberries, 
loganberries 


A heavily constiucted crate 
with slatted front and 
back, solid top and bottom, 
and containing partitions 
subdividing space to con- 
tain 20 drawers, arranged 
in tiers 5 deep. Drawers to 
contain 2 or 6 baskets each. 
Gross weight when filled 50 
to 70 lb. 


Berry drawers 14 by 8 by IH 
in. of >2-in. ends and >4- in. 
side.s and bottoms. Dimen- 
sions of chest outside meas- 
ure 39?^4 in. long, and 16H 
in. high, and 17J-^ in. wide. 
Tops, ends and partitions, 
both horizontal and vertical 
of ?i-in. stuff; sides of ^g-in. 
material 


Cherry and fig box . . 


Cherries, figs 


A rectangular box to hold 
loose or faced fruit, or eight 
paper cartons; a cross 
partition divides the space 
equally; gross 9 to 11 lb., 
net 8 to 10 lb.; package 
approximately 1 lb. 


2?i by 9 by 19?i in. outside 
measure, sides and partition 
of J-^-in. stuff, sides of 
5{6-in. material 



The Best Container.^ — The best market package has the following 
qualities: 

(o) Sufficient strength to insure safe arrival at destination and to 
withstand all ordinary handling. 

(6) Convenient size and form for ease of handling in loading, in trans- 
porting, and on arrival. 

(c) Lightness consistent with strength, to cut down freight costs and 
to reduce likelihood of rough handling. 

{d) Construction to insure any necessary ventilation between pack- 
ages during transporting. 

(e) Economy in cost. 

(/) A convenient size and type to help buyers in computing amount 
of contents. 

ig) Cement-coated fasteners of a kind which will neither slip nor draw. 

{h) Solid tops, rather thin burlap or cloth covers, to insure strength of 
package and protection of contents. 

Shipping Carload Lots 



When car-lot shipments are possible, there results a saving in trans- 
portation rates and in handling at the terminal. Car-lots call for rather 
large outputs, however, as shown by the figures of what normally consti- 
tute a carload (sign for which is C/L). 



494 



FARM MANAGEMENT 

Fruits and Vegetables — Car Load Lots 



Product 


Usual size of car 


Size of container 


Amount con- 
stituting a carload 




33 ft. 2?i in. long* 
8 ft. 2H in. wide 
7 ft. 7K6 or 7 ft. 5Hs in. high 


4 by 12 by 20 in. size of 
container, — 20 lb. net 
each box. Two layers in 
a box wrapped in paper 


1,200 to 1,500 




boxes 


Cherries 


ditto 


Drawers containing 10 lb. 
net 


2,500 to 3,000 
drawers 


Apricots 


ditto 


4 basket crates containing 
6 lb. net — each basket 


1,200 to 1,500 
crates 


Grapes 


ditto 


4 basket crates, each 
basket containing 5 lb. 
net 


1,200 to 1,500 
crates 




ditto 


80 to 90 lb. 


About 375 boxes 




to a carload 


Grapefruit 


Same as lemons 


60 to 75 lb. 


Same as lemons 


Apples 


Local shipments sometimes box 
cars. Long distance Pacific 
Fruit Express cars 


38 to 45 lb. Size of box 
10x11x22 in. 3>^-4-and 
43-2 tiers in box 


600 to 800 boxes 
in car 


Pears 


ditto 


40-45 lb. 9x11x22 in. 
size of box, 4 and 5 tiers 
in box 


600 to' 800 boxes 
in car 




ditto 


Packed in crates contain- 
ing 4 baskets of 5 lb. each 


1,200 to 1,500 




crates a car 


Cantaloupe 




3 sizes. Special crates, 
12 to 15 melons Pony, 
54-in. standard 45 melons 


500 to 700 stand- 




ard crates to car 


Watermelons 


Box car, or Pacific Fruit Express 
cars 


Weigh from 5 to 25 lb. 
each 


1,200 to 2,000 
melons in car 




Same as peach 


Crates of 4 baskets. 
Each basket weighs 5 lb. 
only fancy kind wrapped 
in paper 


1,200 to 1,500 




crates 


Cucumbers 


ditto 


Packed in boxes, 4 x 12 x 20 
in. containing 2J^ to 
3 dozen 


1,200 to 1,500 
boxes 


Peas, green 


ditto 


Packed in drums contain- 
ing 80 lb. net 


300 drums 


Beans, green 


ditto 


Packed in drums contain- 
ing 80 lb. net 


300 drums 




ditto 


28 lb. crates 


28,000 lb. In 34 




ft. car probably 
about one more 
tier than in 32 ft. 
About 1 ,000 
boxes 


Oranges 


ditto 


70 to 80 lb. 


About 375 boxes 
to a car 



Pacific Fruit Express Cars. 



MARKETING METHODS 

Refrigerator Fruits 



495 



Product 


Size of car 




Size of container 


Amount con- 
stituting a carload 




32 ft. 6 in. long, 8 ft. 2Ji in 

7 ft. 21-2 in. high or 
34 ft. AVi in. long 

8 ft. 2?^ in. wide, 7 ft. 3 in. 


. wide 
high 


75 to 80 lb. 


32,000 lb. 400 to 
420 boxes in a car 






ditto 


70 to 72 lb. 


32,000 1b., 444 to 
457 boxes 






ditto 


50 lb. boxes 


28,000 lb., 560 
boxes to car 




Pears 


ditto 


ditto 


ditto 


Plums 


ditto 


26 lb. crates 


28,000 lb., 1,076 
boxes in car 





Poultry and Dairy Products 



Product 


Size of car 


Size of container 


Amount con- 
stituting a carload 


Butter 


Same as lemon 


68 lb. 


24,000 lb. 




ditto 


53 lb. cases 






just 21,200 lb. 




ditto 


75 lb. to cases 






or 28,125 lb. to 
30,000 lb. 


Chickens 


36 ft. long 
9 ft. 9 in. between eaves 


140 lb. to coop. 36 to 42 
chickens in each coop. 
128 coops, but varies 
greatly 


18,000 lb. 



496 



FARM MANAGEMENT 

Live Stock 





Sfze of standard car 


Method of 
loading 


Amount constituting a carload 




36 ft. car | 40 ft. car 




36 ft. 6 in. long or 40 ft. 6 in. long 
8 ft. J-^ in. wide or 8 ft. 6 in. wide 
8 ft. yi in. high or 8 ft. high 


Either in 
single or 

double 
deck car 


125 to 150 to the 
deck 


140 to 175 to the 




deck 




ditto 


Either in 
single or 
double 
deck car, 
but not 
as many 
double 
deck as 
sheep 


75 to 85 to the 
deck 


85 to 95 to the 




deck 


Cows 


ditto 


Single 
deck car 


25 to 28 to a car 


27 to 30 to a car 


Calves 


ditto 


Single 
deck cars 


75 to 85 to a car 


80 to 90 to a car 


Goats 


ditto 


Either 
single or 
double 
deck cars 


140 to 150 to 
the deck 


150 to 170 to 
the deck 


Horses and mules 


ditto 


Single 
deck car 


18 to 20 in a car 


20 to 22 in a car 



Hay and Grain — Carload Lots 



Product 



Size of car 



Size of con- 
tainer 



Amount contained in car 



36 ft. 



40 ft. 



50 ft. 



Wheat 


36 ft. long 
8 ft. 21.^ in. wide 
6 ft. 71-1 in. high 

50 ft. long, 9 ft. 2 in. wide, 
10 ft. high 


90 to 100-Ib. 
sacks 


400 to 500 
sacks or 
40,000 to 
50,000 lb. 


600 to 700 

sacks or 

60,000 to 

70,000 lb. 


950 to 1,000 
sacks or 


Oats 

Rye 


95,000 to 
100,000 lb. 


Feedstuffs 




Hay 


ditto 


200 to 300- 
Ib. bales 


8 tons 


12 tons 


17 tons 


Alfalfa 


ditto 


200 to 250- 
Ib. bales . 


8 tons 


12 tons 


17 tons 


Straw 


ditto 


100 to 200- 
Ib. bales 


5 tons 


7 tons 


10 tons 



CHAPTER XXI 
MARKET QUOTATIONS 

To read regularly the daily or weekly market quotations is to learn 
the tendencies of prices. The resulting information is a basis for making 
selling plans, and deciding where to market if a choice is possible. 
Such quotations are not an infallible guide to what the producer 
should obtain; but they are valuable aids to forecasting the rise and fall 
of prices, for in these quotations are mirrored the best obtainable data 
on the probable course of price changes. "Future" prices for corn or 
wheat or barley — as "May" or "December" — reflect the best guesses 
of experienced traders who are in the market for wholesale sales or pur- 
chases; the way these quotations swing furnishes a means of predicting 
whether the market is likely to rise or to fall. 

Reasons Why Market Quotations are Fallible. — The reasons that 
market quotations are not certain guides are that (1) they are sometimes 
based on quantities far in excess of the usual farmer's offerings; (2) they 
may reflect prices between broker and jobber or jobber and retailer, 
thus carrying the costs and profits of handling beyond the original 
consignee to whom the farmer has shipped or the original buyer of the 
farmer's output; (3) they are sometimes based upon an insufficient num- 
ber of reports so that there may be a chance for the reporting firms to use 
the publications as a means to further private ends; (4) from the quota- 
tions must be deducted costs of freight, commission or middle man's 
profits, unloading, drayage, insurance, warehousing, sometimes repacking 
or resorting before the farmer's return can be determined. 

Even though quotations are not absolutely applicable, their value to 
the producer is great enough to warrant their constant and regular use. 

Quotations of Different Markets Should Be Studied. — If more than 
one market is available to the producer, he should keep posted concerning 
prices in all centers to which he can ship. If a difference exists in the 
quality or quantity demands of these markets, a producer is in a better 
position to decide where he shall ship. Sometimes the net receipts ob- 
tainable in one market when two or more are available to a shipper, are 
sufficiently higher to justify selling there even though freight and com- 
missions may be somewhat higher. 

Usually interest should be confined to but a few products, selecting 
those of immediate importance to the producer or else those the prices of 
which reflect a condition likely to be eventually felt by products of the 
reader. 

32 497 



498 FARM MANAGEMENT 

There is sufficient relationship between various markets so that unus- 
ual offerings or buying demands are felt in all localities, although not 
commonly to an equal extent. Therefore the prices of beef or hogs or 
sheep at Chicago, Omaha, or Kansas City, the price of cotton on the 
southern exchanges, the price of wheat in Liverpool, the prices of other 
commodities in their respective centers, are indices to fluctuating markets, 
and reports covering conditions in these centers should be sought and 
read. 

Quotations Indicate Market Demands. — The quotations are a guide 
to the kind of product most in demand in a given market. For instance, 
the desired weight of hogs or beef is shown by the higher quotations for 
certain sizes; the quality of lamb or mutton or fruit or field crops most 
sought after is gauged by the respective quotations. 

Sources of Market Quotations. — A farmer may find his best source 
of information to be trade journals catering to his subject — such as poul- 
try papers, or dairy reviews, or live stock papers. The agricultural 
press serves the needs of a great many farmers. The daily press is of 
value for early advices of changes, and reflection of conditions, in the 
local markets which it covers. 

The following paragraphs are therefore not offered as final choices 
but rather as suggestive sources. 

The Daily Press is valuable (a) for the speed with which changes in 
market conditions are set forth, (h) the accompanying news items of 
farming conditions, (c) the briefs, often profitably condensed, of federal, 
state, or association reports of crop, stock, and market conditions. The 
value of its quotations is occasionally reduced, in some instances, by the 
limitations of the consulting sources, as already pointed out, which may 
tend to hasty or biased conclusions. 

Trade Journals, Including the ^grn'cwZiwrcrZ Press, confine their atten- 
tion to the products of their special lines, but tend to present their findings 
after careful collection and mature analysis. Their value may be some- 
what restricted by the delay in getting out their findings, particularly 
if the publication comes out only at relatively long intervals, as monthly 
or semi-monthly. 

Crop Estimates. — Since price fluctuations depend somewhat upon crop 
conditions, one should keep posted concerning the outlook for production. 
Two sources are especially valuable in this connection, both being publica- 
tions of the United States Department of Agriculture. These are the 
monthly mimeographed reports of State conditions put out by local 
offices of the Crop Reporting Board of the Bureau of Crop Estimates, 
U. S. D. A., and the printed monthly "Crop Reporter " distributed from 
Washington. 

The mimeographed sheets give a page or two of condensed reports 
of the principal field, truck and fruit crops in the area covered by the 



MARKET QUOTATIONS 499 

local office, compared with United States conditions, to show effect 
of weather upon production prospects, estimates of acreages, probable 
yields, and estimates of production following harvests . A few excerpts 
from sample sheets are illustrative of the kind of information conveyed. 

Release When Received 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

BUREAU OF CROP ESTIMATES 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF. 

Office of Agricultural Statisticians. 

The Crop Reporting Board of the Bureau of Crop Estimates, United States Depart- 
ment of Agriculture, makes the following estimates of crop conditions in California 
and the United States as of (date) 

California Field Crops 

Weather Conditions. — The weather during June was freakish; with several very hot 
days, many days of hot dessicating wind, and a few cool nights, plus rain in some 
sections. These mixed conditions certainly did not improve the outlook for field 
crops, which, generally speaking, are far below normal. 

Corn, Indian. — The acreage to this crop in California shows an increase of 4 per 
cent, making a total of 90,500 acres. The condition is 89 per cent of normal. On 
these figures we forecast a production of 3,141,000 bu. 

Rice. — The acreage planted this year is variously estimated to be between 160,000 
and 175,000 acres. In our opinion about 465,000 acres have been sown, the condition 
of which is 90 per cent of normal as against 94 per cent at this date last year. If, by 
reason of shortage of water, none of this acreage is abandoned our forecast is for a 
production of 9,652,500 bu. 

Wool.- — The season has been favorable for our sheep growers, and the average 
weight of fleeces has been a little better than last year — 7.65 lb. compared with 7 lb. 

Pears are a very spotted crop, making a forecast very difficult. The condition 
is 72 per cent of a normal, compared to 90 1 year ago and a 10 year average of 79. 
The probable production will be about 79,000 tons as against 110,000 last year. 
The pear crop of the United States is forecast at 13,634,000 bu. or about 340,000 
tons. 

Cherries suffered damage from the rainfall, June 14-15, the fruit cracking badly 
in some locaUties. The production this year is estimated to be about 87 per cent of a 
normal crop. 

Winter Wheat. — This crop, taken as a whole throughout our State, has made a 
steady decline since the last report, as of May 1. It is spoken of as being "spotted." 
Unfortunately the poor spots are large, many of them will not be harvested for grain, 
and many of the better spots show a low condition figure. Many days of north wind 
and a few days of unusually hot weather sapped the vitality from the plants and 
prematurely ripened the grain. The result is seen in the low condition figure of 66 
per cent of a normal, as compared with 80 on May 1, 85 1 year ago, and a 10-year 
average of 80. On the basis of present condition, the forecast for this. year's crop is 
9,118,000 bu. from 656,000 acres. Last year the production was estimated to be 
16,335,000 bu. from 990,000 acres. 

In the United States the condition of winter wheat on June 1 was 78.2 per cent 
of a normal, 94.9 last year and a 10-year average of 82.0. The acreage to be harvested 
is about 34,165,000, and forecast of production 503,996,000 bu. The area planted 
to spring wheat is estimated at 19,487,000 acres, and the condition 89.1 per cent of a 



500 FARM MANAGEMENT 

normal, indicating a production of 276,547,000 bu. providing average conditions are 
maintained until harvest time. 

Review of Crop Conditions — (Date) 

The composite condition of all crops in California on June 1 was about 3.6 per cent 
below their 10-year average condition on that date. Last year the June 1 condition 
of all crops was 5 per cent above the average, 2 per cent below the average in 1918. 

The condition of the various crops on June 1, expressed in percentage of their 
10-year averages (not the normal) was as follows: 

Peaches 106.1 Alfalfa 95.7 Pasture 88.4 

Lemons 103 . 3 Berries 95 . 7 Apples 88 . 

Oranges 102.2 Oats 94.5 Pears 86.4 

Sugar Beets 102 . 2 Watermelons 94 . 4 Cantaloupes 83 . 3 

Olives 102.2 Cotton 93.5 Almonds 83.3 

Prunes 97.4 Barley 91.5 Wheat 82.5 

Hay 93.5 Walnuts 90.9 Apricots 77.5 

Average of all 96 . 4 

Review of California Crop Conditions (Date) 

The composite condition of all crops in California on July 1 was about 95.4 or 
4.6 per cent below their 10-year average condition on that date. Last year the July 
1 condition of all crops was 1.8 per cent above the average; 5.8 per cent below the 
average in 1918. 

The local mimeograped reports are regularly obtainable on request to 
the nearest office of the Bureau of Crop Estimates that one's name be 
placed on the mailing list. 

The Monthly Crop Reporter consists of a six or eight-page printed pam- 
phlet, issued monthly, showing the United States summary of conditions 
for such crops as corn, wheat, oats, barley, rye, buckwheat, potatoes, 
flaxseed, rice, tobacco, hay, cotton, apples, cranberries, peaches, pears, 
seed, beans, sorghums, sugar beets, and hops. Tables are included show- 
ing conditions of crops by States, comparisons with former periods, 
amounts of production; special reports being inserted for crops of imme- 
diate interest as onions, sugar beets, wheat, seed production, etc. Addi- 
tional data present findings concerning the status of world agriculture 
or special censuses, and items of agricultural importance as weights of 
grain per measured bushel, trend of production, live stock changes on 
farms, trend of prices, sales by farmers, increase in cost of living, per- 
centage of cotton ginned, cost of producing corn-fed cattle, etc. 

The Monthly Crop Reporter, for others than persons actively cooper- 
ating with the U. S. D. A., can be received by paying a yearly subscrip- 
tion charge of 25^ for domestic addresses, or 40^ for foreign addresses. 
Request is to be made to the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, 
D. C. 

The Bureau of Markets Report. — The Bureau of Markets, of the United 
States Department of Agriculture, publishes a weekly. The Market 



MARKET QUOTATIONS 501 

Reporter, an eight-page printed document, containing information of 
market conditions, changes, and trends in the United States, as reflected 
by receipts, sales, and purchases at the principal market points of such 
staples as hve stock, grain, fruit, vegetables, hay, butter, cheese, feed- 
stuffs, and cotton. Discussions of world market conditions, charts of 
statistics of output and prices, graphs showing the trend of prices, influ- 
ences of factors affecting prices, and similar data, are here recorded. 

The publication is continously obtainable on request to the U. S. D. A. 
Bureau of Markets, Washington, D. C. that one's name be placed on the 
regular mailing list. 

Examples of Quotations. — The best and most reliable quotations are 
found in trade journals devoted to special industries, such as publications 
dealing with beans or rice or wool or cotton or dairy products. The 
quickest reports are found in the daily press. Conservative business 
summaries covering most of the important products of interest in the 
territory covered by the publication carrying them are found in the agri- 
cultural weekly publications. These quotations are set aside in a finan- 
cial section of the publication and are easy to find. 

How Quotations Are Obtained. — Fully to understand quotations and 
to know how much to discount for one's environment, it is necessary to 
find out how quotations are obtained. If the source is the daily news- 
papers, this is of more importance than when one is using the weekly 
summaries of the agricultural press. Different newspapers use different 
methods of collection and consult different sources for their information. 
Common sources in use are: 

Butter, Cheese and Egg Prices. — The Dairy Exchange, where commission men or 
brokers, members of the exchange, dispose of their surplus or purchase to cover 
deficiencies, the last sales establishing the prices for the day and furnishing the data 
pubUshed by the press. 

Barley, Wheat, Oats, Corn Prices. — The Grain Exchange, where immediate sales 
and bids, or prices offered or asked for future deliveries, all being transactions between 
members, are posted on blackboards. 

Produce and Fresh Fruit Prices. — Melons, cantaloupes, potatoes, onions, truck, 
apples, oranges, grapes, etc. : By personal visit or telephone call by reporter or press 
representative to established firms deahng in one or more of these commodities. 
Prices are usually jobber prices to retailer. 

Hay Prices. — Exchange rates between wholesale dealers at points of arrival, free 
on board cars or boats. 

Meat Prices. — Quotations offered by wholesale butchers or packers to producers 
for stock deHvered at receiving centers. 

Bean Prices. — Wholesale prices to jobbers from sales on exchanges, or prices 
furnished reporters by leading bean brokers. 

Symbols or Terms Used in Market Quotations. — Certain trade 
abbreviations and terms are commonly used in reporting quotations. 
These serve materially to shorten explanation and to reduce the amount 



502 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Fruit Market 



fii2-2:>: flood Ril 

Bpnerii-iir$. nominal: Lativ .\pples. J."'i 
Orosoti Newloivns. S2a'2.7i: Arkansas B 
J3'g3.3.j for fancr. J2. 25(^2. 50 tor cbolce 
Davl«. t2.2.)ei2 50. 

.MANDARINS (per crntsl— $2132.50: 



CRAXBrURIRS 
nllANGr-s In-r hnxi-N>"l. 
_J250/S4.W. according to quality. 



GK.iPEFnul I (pel' liiix> — Nev cfop'califor- 

LEMO.NS (per box) — $2'??3.50. according to 
■ ■ [1.25(82. 



VANAS (P(^| 
rn. inv.fi?!!!', -. 
PINEAPPLES (per do:!)— Hawaiian. 11.3(1(3 



5.50, 

AV.lCADnKS (per dozl— Fl 
California. JI.50. 



J.-',J6; 
PUMKciiiiNAl'feS (per pcacb boil— «'..Wia 



VF,<5ET.VBLE9 

POTATOES—Sldewallt price- to 
(floim. 52-5(K''?)2.75: SailOdS. $J..".0 top; Ida 



22.75 



K<H 



>1; .MarVowfat (Kaik). JOcfeSl 
[sack I. fl. 

ONIONS (per ctll— Yellow, 
ralijn (■ro((ii-i. 90rfq'^\: wlm.' *i..>i.'«^i.io; 
:reen onions (prr bo.^1. $1.25(§(1.50. 

EdCri.ANT (per lb)— 7fti8c. • 

PEl'FEBS (per Ibl— Bell. 7(SlSc: CUUe. S 
S7c. 

CARLIC 



r Ibl— R(?^Sc. 

lb)— J0(Q15c. 

CLOU.MBEItS (per iu(J'—«l. 7532.30. 



-No 



lS(tT2f<c. 

BBAXS (per lb)— 15(i?20c: lima. n@llc. 
T(>.MA'rO^K (per rratcl- 75c®i.50. 

Cauiiilower (per 



ate) — 41.50iai.75. 













CHICAGO PIT PRICES 




Quotations fumlghed 
E, P. Hiilton 4 Co.. 
b«r3 N«w York stodt. 
aad Cblciso board of 

COBN— Op^n. 

Xlay l.(»i 

July t.62 

StfPlrmbcr .... 1.55 

OATS— 


lis Wtst 
colUm BDi 

Hl«h. 

4 i.snH 

. 1.63tj 
1.55(4 

.68 (.4 

.68 

.65 

50.70 

31.92 
31.60 

27.9S 


enlnc HrrtJd b 
00^ ee ezcJluuai 

Low. Clo"* 
1.67 1.63 
1.61% 1.62 
1.52H 1.6315 




Bw'rmber ., 
POBK- 


... .68 
... .05 


.6754 .ervi 
.esH .64 

50.40 50.70 
.... 63.50 

31. 7T 31.92 
31.45 31.60 






^ LABD— 

JulJ 

Bwlrmber . 


...31.80 


KIBS— 

JmIt 

MW,> , 


...17.80 


57.77 27,fl2 
2S.90 







SPOT COTTON. 










fraCLliaiVB D1I5PAT(3I 


1 






mrw YORK. Dec 2».— Spot co 




„ 






:s to lo for mtddline u 


















New Orleai 










'»«>:,"« iPhls and tiltle Rn>.li. 






H UB 













roiJiyi'RV PRICES. 

PnuTTR^— Pni:»8 lo iirpducert: 
Tlfrifl. Sfl \tif. and undtr to thp dee...', ..$ 
Hen, orvpr 36 Iba and udHo 42 lbs. to the 

Hrna. nr^r i2 Ihf! ' U " th*' fioz" . .V. ".".■!! '.'. 
Hem, colored, wpijhinu 4 lb«. and ipt each 
BroUe™. wpighinjt 1 lb. and to 1', IbB.... 
Broilers. T4 lbs. and tip, 


.33 
.nr. 


Rfw*lCT9. soft bone. 3 IH, atn? up......k,. 

PUgs 

OM rnrVf 

rnirK-1.n(r>, 3^ lb-, and -m 

Dm-klirir*. other than Pekins. 3'^ lbs. up.. 
Diii"kft. "old," 3H It*!- *nd up 




.4fl 
.00 


Ren i \irkf\% 

LtplBun harp ,\". , '■'."'.*.■.■.'.■.'.*."■".'.'.'.'■'.'.'.' 
8qU»bs ....."., 

Old pigflons, ri(T di'. I 



MILO REACTS TO WEAK 
CLOSE; BARLEY STEADY. 

"oar* "^^awfc ^i^e 

Bjdn- mu.cvl HpujiTlTi. a .Ironcer close (••V 
neaib all d.iiiiu - .1. n.- (li.. session on the 

ksral gram el 'rlnv hiit niilo M.is 

(liill and u, , : , , ,lo.-idi5l dowimard, 



ellir 



lilo 



25 rents per tod lo\ 

months (Iroitppd 5(* ren(s. Inmie:tiate ttdli- 
nient 1.arlo,v closed (inrlinnccd to ."0 cents pel 
ton Iii-licT. while the defened moiilhs advanced 
50 cents iiei- ten. AsUTi a sale of all May 
barley at V."-'!\i. 

DAILY HOARD QUOTATIONS. 

Arrlvalii-Wl.cat, 2: corn. 1: oala. 1: li.ilo 
PUizc. 1(1; (lorn. 2: Imn. 1: C. 5. & IToJuvts, 
2: irtal. 25. Ha), 9. 

Corn. hi.Uf— Rid: A9k(M. 

No. 2 yelloi\. spot $2.05 

No. 2 y,:lon. Kuneit 2,00 S2.in- 

No. 3 .Y«li.iiv l.so l.'jO 

No. 3 jellmv. tranelt l.Sl'i 

Milo maiae. car lots-, 

111 iraii.it ■.!!!!:!;!;;!!!..■:; 1^54 iisr't 

KVlav sliipiiinit l.s;'-j l.fiji^ 

2(idnV fliiiracnl ■.■.'.'.'.■.■.■.■.!; l!82',4 j.85 

Bjilei— f 

no iracl< I.r.;v, 

Ifi.ljv tlilMiiedt l.r,.-, I. CD 

15-day sliiiniient 1.55 !.!,» 

PLTURE DELIVERY— lOO-'l'ON LOTS. 

Milo inai/e — Bid. Asked 

Ml liecetuber l.wi ,, 

All Fcl-niarr' '.'.'. i . • '•■'. 1-85 l!yii^ 

Uorlev— 

All January 1.58% 

AU May I.38H l.n'4 

YESTESDAVS SALEE^ 

Milo maize — 
1 ear eput J1.S2',; 

Baric; — 
100 tons, all May »l.37',i 



BUTTER AND EGGS: 

LATEST QUOTATIONS. 



JjOS ANOELEa. Ma? 8. — Butter. fTeamerv 
f xtra". Prodacw ErchtngB closing prLe, 60 
tm lb. 

BOof) — rrwh ^sfraa, Pmdltc© Exi-baoee clis. 
iTiff i-rtc*. 4n per d-^t. : i-a»e cnunt. Prnrtnce V.x- 
fhar^ge rlofinR prtr-. 48 Per dcr. : niillrts. Pro- 
dur« ET^hdnp^ clfwinr pric*. 47 otr dos. 

CHnzSIi— 30 per lb 

OTHEn MAnKKTa. 

IPY A, P. NIGHT wme \ 

FftAXtTWO. M»T 8.— Bulla-. VIV^. EUSs. 



flr»», f,^Cd:i9 Ees* I 



flrrt*. 431^44: ordln, 



47Mi. 



unohajwed. chfr^e fin 



LIVE-STOCK MARKETS 
AT VARIOUS CENTERS. 



__N1GHT 
I— HcES. 
>e3tcrda,v 
■'igM 
lOSO: 

'vund i>igs,"'l0.25(al0..jO. 



IRE 1 



llCiGO. Dec. 29— Uecs. 20.lHlir:To 

10 40 on iigiit li^hta'; practical lop 

9..80(?10.1O; v'CS 

900b;" eominon and meriiiim 



:tir„i . 



:p. 13.000: 
fed i?(-Jte 



and heifers; boloniia 



beef 
stead: 



^".(45.35 



OMAHA (Neb.) Dec. 20 — Hntfs, re 
optly 25<Moiier tlian JosterdaVa 
cdiiim and lipbt hntcliecs. ISl-rll 
ill: stioiKTvc ifht and packing :;radi 
haef 

.... 0.95: 

2r, higher: bulla ( 



top load. 0.95 : hutchel 



tiiir 

- _ 50: 
e«es, 5.50: 
1». 

Hpts 12.000; 

.' S nijipD.lS. 

k.%'te«dy to 
ipoti Uinher; 
dv. llhctV.. 
liiShei, »|.ot 



ST«des. bteadj- 

S.W FRAXrnrO, Der. 20 — Hozs, 1(W> tn ir>o 
101^; l.'iO to 2:£r, ponnd?", It Mi "'" " 



9.U0; 



.'O loHtr : 

US,' lO.oagll.OQ; ewes, 3.50 
PAL'L (Minn.) Dec. '2n, — Catt 



TMO. tteers. 25 to :■<> 
hHfera. 3 -Xi&^y.'^^X 






c-iiftsrs. :.'7B(»-I.WJ 

be-^t Ijght, 9..i.'>. 
.■ilow; aMiit 2.-. 1 
'.1.3(hS0.4l>: bulk- 
lO.OU. Sbecp. re 
hi;rlier; top lambs 
I'ORTMND (Or 

Tnn^S.Od! medlifr 
Kood. flr.(.^7 r.u: 

n.0(Hrf(*50: cm'rhni 



-ua -bulla. 4.00©D:M;.i«'Hi 



.00t5, ... 

>0 'h Chi 
0: 
9.00<af>.f;0 
, „- „ - liRi 
■elpts 500 






and hpbt lighU. 9.7514 

3 500; market 25 to r,0 

il.-Jo: best light e^^e». 4..W 

■- £.'>.— Ofittle hlgber; re- 

? COCO'S. 75 :_fiood to choke. 

liirlce. 7.0O@'7.0O: fait to 

fair. 



0.00(017.00; good to (holce. 

good. 5.d0lff(!.00. fnit re 
aminon tn fair, 4 Oft&^.OO 
Lulls .^.O0@<;.0O; cliniue 
:i(iO: prtme light, 1000(3 



7,50: Tjefft fetiler-, G.2:'(a7.2r): fair to good, 0.75 
S'H.lTt. Hi.gs. highei ; no receipts; |>i-inie mixed. 
lOr.'xgn.W; smooth heavv. 10.»>@U.00: rouKh. 
«.'f:C"(l.:iO; fat pigs. 9.501*10.50; feeder y gs. 7.00 
(S3 OO s'leep higher; ho receipLR. cast ot moun- 
tain lamb-. iKOOcSir.lO; Mllpy. ; OOlif' 50; feed- 
er=i, r. (((a:'*C.,00: culK ri.OO only; e«P3. 4.00® 
4..'.'*; lirhr \e,trlingB. li.0O(fl'7.0O; h£a.ry 5.00<g0.00. 



op. 9.:ho 

good 



dy; fno^ly 3.00 



11.00; fe^dci 
>'s atei 



6 Inner; tajik, goort 
?10 00 choce «j)ck 
1. rempla. 20W; fat 
, best lliiu- SO-pouTi.l 
yoxng lamba, ll.^o; 





HIDK >r.\RKET 








lEXCElSlVB DIaPATCn 


1 




MTI, 


AlKPE May 8 — Blden. Grefttl 




'^^»,'*' 


ind, l«(iil« NO 2 i6(l»17 










cured, bider. 1 




1SS20: cured. 25 ponjds 








e'1 \o a hides. 25 Round- 




up.' lOc? 




ed No 1 hidl hidea. I.VSIO; 






H(J15 


drv aallikl hldfls. 27(»30 






mtil hide. S3l»3e: drv r.nl 














7 O0(tl 


0(1 ,Vo. 2. 4 OOoeoo r.lf 






No. 1 


teala. 8 lo 15 pounds, ^m4 






No 2, 


S to 15 rounds a4i.4(t»43i^ 


e.c 












8. No 2. 2.10(312 55. kipi. c ? 








Jd ?n«31 : C. f M 2 i.sn 








2-(»28: 8 No 2. Jf;U*o< 




Vo. 1 




20 






t akin, ppr round, 35(^50 






Tallrw, nrirea ,Mo. 1 Mild. 






>(B;11H do. No, 2. S'itaS 


per 







Fig. 94. — Sample market Quotations. 



MARKET QUOTATIONS 



503 



of reading needed to grasp the market situation. Typical ones are 
given immediately below. 

Examples of Symbols Used in Market Quotations: 

1. The sign "@" means to and indicates the ranges, as barley quoted "$1.30 @ 
$1.60'' shows the variation in price for the period covered by the report. 



Tbpl 



COMMENT. 

""calitom.,' 



f ef , cftttl*. 



Hom i 



lor(U 



Soumem-CRlifOluiJ 



kit i.l tb. 
larkeT i* 
o $11 ,W 

laoibs from Ci 
aclng .Biltv [""ind'. Bolt 
-19 pT honrt'cil. The Ii 



3iprove:iient 



thci 






WINTER WHEAT 
GRAIN FORECAST 



Prospective Production Bigger 
by 63,000,000 Bushels. 



Department of Agriculture 
Issues April Figures. 



Condition in All States but 
California 100 Per Cent. 



t»r .c p. MGHT mm I 

WASHrNOTON. Mnj S.--Wlnt€r «h^t fniclnc. 
tJon this ytKV will be S9».91fi 0<K> h.i.h^l*. ?n 
iB-rexte durina Atril of C3.00<l.0"iy huslielfl. (Ik- 

It^ fpirraBt b«*ed un conditions t-nisflnz MaJ 1. 
»Sico nral IOCS per crnl. 0/ ii noimji. i>nd ulxin 



Iht 



or 



be 



hicb 



ra> plKced at ^S 833.000 acre^. 
f I 1 1X1 p.nl from Ibe «^ra ! 
ITodortlnn of r^e was foreta- 



ando 






MtliiiHleJ 



837.0fW'noO 



t lOl.OOD.Oiiu bushel-, 
wnuo loat if-ara i^mtor wbf-4t cop "33 5r.3.- 
44».00n busbola. and tha na Top R'j.I03.(KW 

Cotidillon of »iaior »he«l eo 

M»J I iMt yaar and 85.4 the 



«?.4 "0 



Produce Dealers 
Face Increased 
Drayage Charges 

Another Utile addition to the high 
cost of ♦Iving will go Into effect nexl 
Monday with tho new schedule «1 
charges by the Draymen's Association 
of San Francisco. Charges for haul- 
ing fruits and vegetables fromi the 
docks to the cOTnmisslon houses and 
visaversa .ire almost double the 
previous rates. 

The drayage charge to commission 
houses for a chest of 20 drawers of. 
berries will be 25c a chest. The new- 
rate on apples is 5c a box; Oranges 
Oc box; Cantaloupes 5c a cfate or Ivs 
box. 

Following Is a parr of the n<w 
Jrayaga schedule that will go Intc 
offfct next Monday; 

To Commission Houses: 

Fruit (per crate) Mt 

Fruit (per lug box) 4c 

Potatoes (sacks, crates) 7'.4r 

Pears (boxes) 4 fee 

Vegetables (sacks) 7 Vie 

Watermelons (per load) J7.51 

Watermelons (per car) $22. 5(] 

l.emons i(.box) .5i 

Celery (UT^e crates) 12V4d 

Vsparagna Oug box) 5c 

ICBRPlarU (crates) 15C 

i-'iirrents (chest) 30c 

The new charge on poultry will be 
50c a coop. All vegetables will cost 
71.40 a sack, A charge of Ho will bo 
made for . returning empty boxes. 



HOGS GO HIGHER IN CHICAGO. 

CHICAGO. July 11.— Hogs at a new 
record-breraking figure of J23 per 
hundred pounds by Saturday was as- 
sured, said packers when the live- 
stock market opened today with 
hogs at $22.90. Later the prlc« went 
to $22.95. 



. fR^OPyCE N0TES~1 



CALIFORNtA HENB LOWEE. 
routrr dealers today reported 80c 1 
ti-enie price for California hens Sa 
frjecs were made at 3jc per povind. 

POTATO PRICES HIOHEB 



Rala 






$3 and $3.25 per 
Kb. but are a triflt 
of the «eel; s.rei 
S4.50 and $4.75 per 



There 
corn torfay aa 
quairty. Good quality large atoek 
to $4.7o per satk. but tte" smallei 
sola do^TD to $3,75. The general p 






I $4 to $4.50, 



FIRST 1819 ALMOKIW HERE. 
H.Tort er & Soda, dried fruit iijerohantf 
■.received t Bmall shipmeul of 1910 'al 
da from their ratK^h at Blpoo. This Is tb* 



The ui 
•d out 1 

nana Is 



Ith tb« firat of the 



■2!ir a bonlowor 
la of to $2 and $3 1 



STRAWBERRIES LOWER. 

.^trawberrl.s sold senerjly at SIO fo $11 a 

" ■ " ■ 'es v.?i>orle<l at 



Almond Growers 
Expect $3,000,000 
Crop This Year 



The tlT»t cnrlond of new-crop 
nlmondn wo.s nblpped from the 
warehouse of the Collfomln 
.\lmond CpoiverV Exchange, 
Ctlco, on AuguKt J3. It con. 
»l«<ed of 500 bxKi of Nonpnrell 
nimonds and wps Hold to o IVetv 
York purchaser. The exchnnice 
evpeetn to move almond car- 
loads dallj* rrom no\r on. 

The CsllfornlR almond crnv 
for 1910 It estimated at about 
S.'i.ooO.OOO. The quality this sea- 
son Is exceptionally fine, due to 
the fOTofablc climatic condl- 



Fig. 95. — Samples of news items from financial pages of the daily press. 



2. The term "quiet" or "nominal" means that there is little activity in the 
particular products referred to, so little at times that no quotations are possible. 

3. A "strong" or "firm" market is one showing signs of higher prices; a "weak" 
market is the reverse — a tendency to "break" to lower price levels. 

4. A "future" is an immediate transaction in products for future dehvery, a 
"bid" being the price offered, a "sale" reporting the price paid. Futures are for 
selected months; e.g. (wheat), "May, $2.10 bid; $2.12 asked." "Dec, $2.00 bid; 
$2.02 asked," means offers by purchasers for wheat to be delivered in May were 
at the rate of $2.10 while sellers asked $2.12; for Dec. delivery buyers offered $2.00, 



504 FARM MANAGEMENT 

sellers were asking $2.02. Future sales serve to show the present feeling as to what 
prices will be during the months involved. 

5. "Spot" sales are cash sales for immediate delivery, the word signifying a sale 
"made on the spot." Spot sales are best indications of daily prices. 

6. "Steady" means no change in market. 

7. "Steady to strong" means sales at same or better prices than previous quota- 
tions: "in spots lighter" means occasional sales somewhat below the general average. 

8. Quotations "on track" cover products en route or on siding ready for un- 
loading; a qualifying phrase as "10-day shipment" designates the interval to elapse 
before arrival. 

9. "l.c.l." means less than carload lots. 

10. "f.o.b." means free on board (car or boat). 

11. "f.a.l." means free alongside (boat). 

12. "f.a g." means fair average quality. 

In addition to the general terms there are specific trade names attach- 
ing to many products. 

Quotations vary somewhat in their presentation. Some quote live 
stock on a pound basis, others on a 100-lb. basis. Some quote grain at 
so much per bushel; others at so much per 100 lb., per cental. Usu- 
ally western quotations are on the 100-lb. basis while eastern quotations 
are on the bushel basis. 

Examples of Measures Used in Market Quotations. — 

Eggs — dozen 
Butter — pound 
Cheese— pound 
Hay — ton 

Poultry — pound or per dozen 

Barley, oats, corn, milo, Egyptian corn, kafir, wheat — bushel; hundredweight. 
Hogs, beef — pound, hundredweight. 
Ewes, wethers, lambs — pound, hundredweight. 

(Often abbreviated to read: doz. — dozen, lb. — pound, cwt. — hundredweight, 
bu. — bushel.) 

Past Quotations a Guide to Selling. — Suggestions regarding the best 
time of year to sell (based on the price differences of farm products as 
between periods of high and periods of low prices) and regarding the 
possibility of profit-making by holding products for higher prices not 
withstanding the increased costs involved, are obtainable from a study 
of past quotations. Findings resulting from the collection and tabula- 
tion of past quotations can not be accepted as sure guides to selling, for 
changing conditions make changes in market demands; yet for the pur- 
pose of providing a starting point in marketing, a knowledge of what has 
occurred is of distinct advantage. 

Five-year Periods to be Used in Studying Past Quotations, — Some 
judgment must be exercised in selecting the period from which the quo- 
tations are to be taken. A sufficient period of years should be chosen to 
insure reasonably safe averages, and yet not enough to cause the inclusion 



MARKET QUOTATIONS 



505 



of obsolete data. Quotations should be selected often enough to reflect 
changes as soon as they occur. Ordinarily in the author's personal experi- 
ence, the 5 years immediately past are sufficient to serve the purposes of 
the study, with weekly quotations compiled throughout the year, taking 
mid-week figures in order to avoid the heavy sales prior to Sundays and 
the lack of supplies likely to occur immediately after the week-ends. 
The figures are then arranged to show the 5-year average quotations by 
each week and each month throughout the calendar year. Tabulating 
or plotting the findings aids in clearness of presentation and ease in 
analyzing. Such a study is valuable in pointing out (a) the variation in 
yearly averages, (b) the variation in monthly averages, (c) the rise and 
fall of prices when averaged for five years, (d) the period of lowest prices, 
(e) the period of highest prices, (/) the difference in selling price for the 
period of low prices, contrasted with the period of high prices. 

Examples of Past Quotations as a Guide to Selling. — An example or 
two will serve to illustrate the use of past quotations as a guide to selling. 

Past Quotations of Barley As a Guide to Selling. — A study of barley 
prices taken by weeks and averaged by months resulted thus: 



Table 222. — Variations in Market Quotations of Feed Barley Averaged by 

Months; Five-year Period 1915-19 (San Francisco Quotations) 

In Dollars per Hundredweight 



1915 


1916 


1917 


1918 


$1.41 


$1.31 


$2.23 


$2.88 


1.56 


1.37 


2.27 


3.18 


1.41 


1.35 


2.29 


3.63 


1.29 


1.35 


2.72 


3.63 


1.24 


1.33 


2.88 


3.26 


1.07 


1.31 


2.19 


2.80 


1.10 


1.39 


2.11 


2.51 


1.25 


1.58 


2.38 


2.43 


1.18 


1.69 


2.40 


2.37 


1.22 


1.79 


2.51 


2.13 


1.28 


2.06 


2.41 


2.13 


1.30 


2.25 


2.67 


2.21 



1919 



January. . , 
February. . 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August. . . . 
September 
October. . . 
November 
December. 



$2.23 
2.13 
2.06 
2.37 
2.58 
2.64 
3.01 
3.16 
3.03 
2.95 
3.23 
3.57 



Averaged by years the variation amounted to: 



Year 

1915 
1916 
1917 
1918 
1919 



Average Price by Years 
1.28 
1.57 
2.42 
2.76 
2.74 



506 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Averaged by months for the years 1915-1919 the variation amounted 
to: 

Month Average Quotations 

January $2.01 

February 2.10 

March 2.15 

April 2.27 

May 2.26 

June 2.00 

July 2.02 

August 2. 16 

September 2. 13 

October 2. 12 

November 2.22 

December 2 . 40 



From the table of monthly averages low prices, are recorded for the 
three consecutive months of Jan., Feb., and March, and June, July and 
August. High prices occurred during Oct., Nov., and Dec, and March, 
April and May. 

Reference to the variations by months and years brings further en- 
lightment, thus: 

Three consecutive months of lowest and highest prices 



Of lowest prices 


Of highest prices 


1915 


1916 


1917 


1918 


1919 


1915 


1916 


1917 


1918 


1919 


May 
June 
July 


Apr. 
May 
June 


June 
July 
Aug. 


Oct. 

Nov. 

Dec. 


Jan. 
Feb. 
Mar. 


Jan. 
Feb. 
Mar. 


Oct. 

Nov. 

Dec. 


Oct. 

Nov. 

Dec. 


Mar. 
Apr. 
May 


Oct. 

Nov. 

Dec. 



These data result in a belief that May, June, and July are the months of 
lowest prices, and that Oct., Nov., and Dec. being the months of highest prices. 

Past Quotations of Eggs as a Guide in Selling. — A study, similarly 
conducted, covering egg quotations, both by averages and by years, will a 
uniformly regular period of lowest prices during the three consecutive 
months of March, April, May (except in 1917 and 1919 when February is 
a low month), and of highest prices in Oct., Nov., and Dec. (with no 
exceptions). 



MARKET QUOTATIONS 



507 



Table 223. — Market Quotations per Dozen on "Extra" Eggs, Averaged 

BY Days To Nearest Cent, and Shown by Months and Years 

1915-16-17-18-19 (San Francisco Dairy Exchange) 



Month of 





For year 




Average by 


1915 


1916 


1917 


1918 


1919 


months — 5 years 


Cents 


Cents 


Cents 


Cents 


Cents 


Cents 


31 


33 


37 


61 


51 


43 


23 


27 


26 


48 


39 


33 


21 


20 


26 


39 


38 


29 


22 


22 


31 


39 


44 


32 


23 


23 


34 


40 


47 


33 


23 


25 


31 


42 


47 


34 


25 


27 


34 


48 


48 


36 


30 


32 


45 


54 


54 


43 


37 


38 


47 


62 


61 


49 


46 


45 


52 


73 


70 


57 


53 


51 


57 


83 


79 


65 


41 


42 


52 


81 


75 


58 


31 


32 


39 


56 


54 


42 



January 

February 

March 

April . 

May 

June 

July .■ . . 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

Average by years 



Regular and Irregular Fluctuations. — Studies of rise and fall in price 
show that farm goods fall into two general classes. One class includes 
those things which year in and year out fluctuate with more or less regu- 
larity, such for instance as eggs and butter, v/hile the other class includes 
less perishable goods, subject to irregular fluctuations, that is, changes 
coming at different seasons of the year and in varying degree. Such 
things as beans, wheat, barley, oats, and hay make up this second class. 

The Natural Market Course. —The natural market course, according 
to the United States Department of Agriculture is somewhat as follows: 

It starts high with active movement even for inferior stock because the demand 
has the sharp edge of novelty and appetite. The price gradually declines and poor 
stock becomes harder to sell as the supply increases. Lowest prices arrive soon after 
the heaviest shipments begin, and a glut may occur, especially if many sections are 
shipping at once and there is much poor stock. Then, with a decreasing supply, 
prices advance, sometimes recovering much of the early dechnes but usually not 
reaching the opening prices because demand is far less keen at the end of a long 
season. If the last of the shipments are inferior, as happens frequently with many 
perishable crops, the season may close at or near bottom prices. 

The common or natural market developments do not always take place as might 
be expected. Quite frequently superior quality of the main crop or absence of 
general competition will bring higher prices in mid-season. Unexpected shortage 
may cause the reserve stock in storage to sell at high prices at the close of the season, 
especially the less perishable crops like potatoes, onions, apples, cabbage, etc. Careful 
study of crops (shortage, supply, and shipment) should enable a fairly good judgment 



508 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



to be made of the outcome. However, quickly perishable short season crops like 
strawberries or melons are very irregular, so it is difficult to form a reliable market 
judgment of them. 

Periods of High and Low Prices for Various Farm Products on Dif- 
ferent Markets. — From studies made of past quotations — results of 
which should be rechecked for local conditions or later years — findings for 
certain selected farm products were found to range lowest and highest 
during the periods indicated in the subjoined table. 

Table 224. — Periods of High and Low Prices for Selected Farm Products on 
Different Markets (Pre-war Conditions) 5-year Average 



Market 


Product Period of high prices 


Period of low prices 


New York 


Butter 
Eggs, fresh 
Corn 

Red winter wheat No. 2 
No. 1 timothy hay, 
baled 


Nov., Dec, Jan. 
Oct., Nov., Dec. 
July, Aug., Sept. 
Apr., May, June 

May, June, July 


May, June, July 
Apr. May, June 
Dec, Jan., Feb. 
Aug., Sept., Oct. 

Jan., Feb., Mar. 


St. Louis 


Corn 

Hogs 

Red winter wheat No. 2 

Eggs, fresh 

No. 1 timothy hay, baled 


July, Aug., Sept. 
July, Aug., Sept. 
Mar., Apr., May 
Nov., Dec, Jan. 
May, June, July 


Dec, Jan., Feb. 
Dec, Jan., Feb. 
July, Aug., Sept. 
May, June, July 
Jan., Feb., Mar. 


Chicago 


Cattle 
Hogs 
Beans 
Eggs, fresh 

Northern spring wheat. 
No. 1 


Oct., Nov., Dec. 
Aug., Sept., Oct. 
June, July, Aug. 
Nov., Dec, Jan. 

May, June, July 


Apr., May, June 
Dec, Jan., Feb. 
Dec, Jan., Feb. 
May, June, July 

Oct., Nov., Dec. 



Holding Products for High Prices. — Whether or not farmers are justi- 
fied in holding for higher prices depends on the probable amount of 
increase likely to take place when compared with the increased costs 
and risks incident to holding, and the financial status of the farmer. A 
comparison of the percentage increase in prices between the averages 
of periods of high prices and those of low prices, made from the last 
table shows differences in percentage based upon the low average, as 
follows : 

New York Market 

Per Cent 

Butter 25 

Eggs, fresh 91 

Corn 12 

Red winter wheat No. 2 ^ 12 

Timothy hay, baled No. 1 13 



MARKET QUOTATIONS 509 

St. Louis Market 

Per Cent 

Corn 18 

Hogs 13 

Red winter wheat No. 2 12 

Eggs, fresh 67 

Timothy hay, baled. No. 1 13 



Chicago Market 

Per Cent. 

Cattle 15 

Hogs 14 

Beans 7 

Eggs, fresh 65 

Northern Spring Wheat No. 1 10 



Producing for Periods of High Prices. — From studies such as these 
producers will note that for certain products extra effort is worth while 
to have them for sale during the periods of high prices as in the case of 
eggs, butter, cheese and, at times, certain live stock. How far one can 
justify increased expense of production for sale at high market levels, 
will be determined by the amount of price increase likely to be obtained. 
In the same way conclusions can be made as to the profits likely to accrue 
if one holds his product for the times of increased demand, after deducting 
the necessary changes for storage, spoilage, shrinkage, loss of interest, etc. 

It is obvious that perishables are sold most profitably as soon as they 
are ready for the market. There are products that justify the exercise 
of some judgment and foresight in finishing them for market when they 
are least likely to meet with competition — especially the competition of 
fellow-farmers forced to sell in order to obtain operating capital. But 
analyses such as these here presented result in the dictum that in general 
the best interest of most farmers is served by selling whenever their prod- 
ucts are ready for the market. This seems to be true even of such imper- 
ishables as wheat, oats, barley, hay, cattle, swine, and sheep, since the 
sum available at time of peak prices, to cover increased charges, is relatively 
small. For the products and markets already discussed, the range in 
money amounts only to : 

Money Difference in Periods of High and Low Prices 

New York Market 

Butter 7^ per pound 

Eggs, fresh 21^ per dozen 

Corn 8(zS per bushel 

Red winter wheat, No. 2 13ff per bushel 

Timothy hay, baled, No. 1 $2 . 87 per ton 



510 FARM MANAGEMENT 

St. Louis Market 

Corn 10^ per bushel 

Hogs $1 . 03 per hundredweight 

Red winter wheat, No. 2 13?^ per bushel 

Eggs, fresh 11^ per dozen 

Timothy, hay, baled $2 . 55 per ton 



Chicago Market 

Cattle $1 . 22 per hundredweight 

Hogs 1 . 07 per hundredweight 

Beans 15^ per hundredweight 

Eggs, fresh llfi per dozen 

Northern spring wheat, No. 1 lOjii per bushel 



Use of Past Quotations as a Normal in Reporting Prices. — Past his- 
tory of prices as a means of judging the price of any product based on its 
normal relationships is now being made use of in reporting general price 
outlooks. '^^ By use of this method prices for any given month are com- 
pared with the average of the past 10 corresponding months. 

Example of Reporting Prices Based on Past Quotations. — Corn averaged 
$1.08 for the 10 Julys from 1910 to 1919. In July, 1920 it was $1.53, or 
142 per cent of the 10-year average. Hogs averaged, for the same 10 
Julys, $11.17. In July, 1920, at $14.65, they were 131 per cent of the 10- 
year average. 

Use of such data may well be accompanied by a business index of 
conditions (Bradstreet's or Dunn's) to show whether or not farm products 
are maintaining a level corresponding to general business conditions 
throughout the country. 

Prorating the Consumer's Dollar 

Prorating Money Spent for Oranges. — The California Fruit Growers' 
Exchange shows that of each dollar paid by the consumer for oranges the 
farmer receives about 33^ The remainder is taken up by: 



MARKET QUOTATIONS 



511 



Table 225. — Dividing the Consumers' Orange Dollar 



Average of 4 years, 1914-1917 



Per box 



Per cent 



1914 1915 1916 1917 1914 1915 1916 1917 



Fruit on tree (all varieties) 

Picking and hauling 

Packing 

Selling 

F.o.b. California 

Freight and refrigeration. 

F.o.b. market 

Jobber's gross margin .... 

Jobber's selling price 

Retailer's gross margin. . . 
Consumer paid 



51.150 
0.106 
0.325 
0.052 
1.633 
0.927 
2.56 
0.39 
2.95 
1.48 
4.43 



705 

106 

325 

057 

193 

937 

13 

41 

54 

38 

92 



$1,978 
0.106 
0.325 
0.064 
2.473 
0.937 
3.41 
0.40 
3.81 
1.27 
5.08 



J1.621 
0.106 
0.325 
0.061 
2.113 
0.937 
3.05 
0.41 
3.46 
1.43 
4.89 



25.9 

2.4 

7.3 

1.2 

36.8 

21.0 

57.8 

8.8 

66.6 

33.4 

100.0 



34.6 

2.2 

6.6 

1.2 

44.6 

19.0 

63.6 

8.3 

71.9 

28.1 

100.0 



38.9 

2.1 

6.4 

1.2 

48.6 

18.5 

67.1 

7.9 

75.0 

25.0 

100.0 



33.2 

2.2 

6.6 

1.2 

43.2 

19.2 

62.4 

8.4 

70.8 

29.2 

100.0 



Prorating Money Spent for Apples. — A study of Oregon apples 
■resulted in findings to the effect that for each dollar paid by the New 
York consumer the farmer receives 34 (Z^ for the large fruit and 47^ for 
the medium-sized fruit. The table shows the details. 



Table 226.— Dividing ' 


PHE Consumers' Apple Dollar 






Spitzenberg, retaihng 

at 75 jf per dozen, 96 to 

the box 


Johnathan, retaihng 
at 25^ per dozen, 120 
or more to the box 




Average in 

cents per 

box 


Percentage 

of retail 

price 


Average in 

cents per 

box 


Percentage 

of retail 

price 


Grower receives, f.o.b. orchard 

Freight 

Refrigeration 

Broker's profit 

Cartage from dock 


$1.85 
0.50 
0.10 
0.15 
0.05 
0.25 
1.65 
0.95 

$5.50 


33.6 
9.1 
1.8 
2.7 
0.9 
4.5 
30.0 
17.3 


$1.40 
0.50 
none 
0.15 
0.05 
0.15 

0.75 

$3.00 


46.7 

16.7 

none 

5.0 

1.7 


Wholesaler's profit 


5.0 


Retailer's expenses 




Retailer's net profit 


25.0 


Gross retail price 





512 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Proration of Money Spent for Onions. — The division of the consumers' 
dollar when applied to onions delivered during 1919 to the San Francisco 
market was found on the basis of 100 lb. of Australian brown onions 
to be:i34 

Table 227. — Dividing the Consumers' Onion Dollar 



Proportion to: 


Per 100 lb. 


In cents 


In percentage 


Grower 

Container 

Jobber 


$1.51 
0.16 
0.87 
1.66 


36 

4 

20 


Retailer 


40 






Gross retail cost 


$4.20 









Comparison of Retail Prices and Farmers' Receipts. — In 1919 a 
California study of retail store prices and farmers' receipts resulted 
thus: 



Table 228.- 


-Comparison 


OF Retail Prices and Farmers Receipts 




What farmer re- 
ceives (average) 
cents 


What consumer 

pays (average) 

cents 


Pink beans 


5 

5 

10 

12 

25 

14 

10 ^ 

14 

31 

24 
5^ 
2H 


12 H 


Small white beans 


123>^ 


Lima beans 


15 


Prunes, size 50-60s tn the lb 


18 


Dried apricots. . . . 
Dried peaches. 






35 
20 


Dried raisins 


15 


Dried pears 


25 


Walnuts 


45 


Almonds 


35 


California rice 


12K 


Potatoes . 


8 







Other studies appearing from time to time illustrate the fact that in 
general the farmer receives only a portion — sometimes a small portion — 
of the money paid by the ultimate consumer. 

Reasons for Price Spread Between Producer and Consumer. — There 
are reasons why farmers can not expect to receive all of what buyers 
pay. A few of these may be summed up as: 

(a) The waste from spoiling, breakage, and leakage from the time 
goods leave the farmer's hands until they reach the customer. 



MARKET QUOTATIONS 513 

(b) The desire, oftentimes the necessity, of farmers marketing for 
cash as soon as their goods are ready. As this means dumping goods 
on a market unable to resell immediately to customers, extensive invest- 
ments in warehouses, refrigerating plants, and other vast means for 
holding goods over are required to insure sufficient supphes to feed the 
people and to prevent the bottom dropping out of prices. 

(c) There are, too, the customer's tastes in buying, educated too often 
to expensive views. The average housekeeper prefers to buy the same 
meats, vegetables, eggs, butter, milk, and other farm products over 
marble counters, from glass cases, from attractive stands. 

The retailer must meet such things as telephone costs, automobile 
deliveries, small packages, labor required to put up small orders, marble 
tops, plate glass windows, fancy labels, and the hundred and one things 
which up-to-date trade has taught the consumer to demand. All of 
these things cost money which the consumer must pay, and are items 
in which the farmer cannot expect to share. 

(d) The credit demanded by customers or offered by stores. 

(e) The necessity of working-over farm products before they are 
ready for sale, e.g., the removal of smut from grain, which costs $3.00 
to $4.00 per ton (pre-war prices) ; the removal of weed seeds or of burs, 
stones, discolored or off-sized specimens and other trash which must be 
hand picked from vegetables to be canned or retailed; the re-handling and 
grading of eggs. The presence of unassorted sizes, speckled, off-color, 
immature, or over-mature fruit, adds much to the work of grading, sorting 
and packing. 

All these things involve extra expense in preparing crops for market, 
following any work which may be done by the farmer, and necessitate 
items of cost and facilities which, at the present time, cannot be success- 
fully met or provided by the farmer. These items total a sum often 
large enough to account fully for a wide difference between the cus- 
tomer's payments and the farmer's receipts. 

Even at that, though the middleman (in one form or another), as 
already pointed out, can never, in the author's opinion, be entirely ehmi- 
nated, the investigator will soon find that there is room for great improve- 
ment in marketing methods by curtailing waste, avoiding duplication, 
and disseminating data concerning market conditions. It is a duty 
of the farm manager to find, and use, those channels which are least 
liable to carry an overhead of extravagance, of inefficiency, and possibly 
of dishonesty. 

Conclusion 

The marketing problem is at best a hard one, since for the bulk of 
his production the farmer plants, grows or breeds, rears, and fattens, puts 
in a whole season, or, as in the case of orchards or stock, several years, 
before he can tell with any accuracy what is to be his financial reward. 

33 



514 FARM MANAGEMENT 

In view of this uncertainty, which can not be wholly done away with, 
especially as world-wide influences have their effects upon most markets, 
the best information that one can gather as to demands, and the furthest 
one can go in perfecting his marketing method, will still leave much to be 
desired; yet, with conditions as they are, the farm manager can not in 
justice fail to inform himself and to exert his influence in bringing about 
improvements wherever possible. 

Partial List of References to Literature upon Marketing 

From the farm management standpoint there is a great shortage of 
literature on marketing. This chapter gives merely an idea of what is 
needed, e.g., the specific requirements of given markets, time of under- or 
over-supply, best sizes of packages, grade requirements, ways of reduc- 
ing cost of distribution, limitations of distance on shipments, value of 
product, perishability, transportation rates. 

In discussing marketing data past tendencies have been toward 
generalities rather than toward specific information utilizable by the 
farmers and farm managers. The future holds promise of supplying 
something in the way of real help. In reporting the work of the Office of 
Markets and Rural Organization of the U. S. D. A., Brand says:^^^ 

"It is believed that effective and economical methods for distributing and market- 
ing farm products should go hand in hand with scientific methods of production, as it 
profits Uttle to improve the quality and increase the quantity of our crops if we can 
not learn when, where, and how they may be sold to advantage. To provide for 
a study of the problems involved, Congress during the spring of 1913 appropriated 
funds for the establishment and operation of the Office of Markets. The Office of 
Rural Organization was established a year later in order to determine the possibilities 
and encourage the use of organized cooperative effort in improving rural conditions. 
These two offices were combined on July 1, 1914, and the combined unit is known as 
the Office of Markets and Rural Organization." 

Some of the lines of investigation of the federal Bureau of Markets 
cover : Reasons for success or failure of (a) farmers' cooperative purchas- 
ing and marketing; (&) business office practices in use by farmers' market- 
ing, distributing, and purchasing organizations, to determine best 
methods; (c) market surveys — methods and costs — to bring about better 
distribution of unusually large crops; {d) the practical)ility of a market 
news service to promote distribution of farm products; (e) a study of 
present methods of gathering, handling, grading, packing, and shipping 
of farm products; (/) a study of commercial methods of distributing and 
marketing foodstuffs in cities in order to work out ways to avoid gluts and 
under-supplies; {g) a study of transportation and storage, to aid in solv- 
ing problems connected with these factors of distribution ; {h) parcel post 
as a means of direct dealing between producer and consumer; (^) a study 
of marketing live stock, meat, and animal by-products, to note efficiency 



MARKET QUOTATIONS 515 

of different methods and the equitabihty of prevailing rates and customs; 
(j) marketing dairy products under various systems of selhng cream, but- 
ter, milk; costs of grading and milk distribution; prices; (fc) handling, 
marketing, and utilization of cotton and its products; (l) cotton standards 
and cotton testing. 

Several publications of distinct farm management value, although 
sometimes of purely local importance, have already come forth, while 
others are promised. The scope of this material can be gathered from the 
titles and a brief review of the subject matter. 

Publications Concerned with Fruits. — U. S. D. A. Bulletin 298, dated August 31, 
1915, by Wells A. Sherman, Houston F. Walker and L. Herbert Martin describes the 
peach supply in the U. S. and its distribution in 1914. The presentation describes 
methods of marketing peaches, areas of production, shipping seasons, and amount 
of shipment. 15 pages and chart. 

U. S. D. A. Bulletin 320, dated Sept. 15, 1915, by Clarence M. Moomaw and 
M. M. Stewart, reports apple market investigations of 1914-15 conducted in selected 
apple producing areas and city markets east of the Mississippi River. The investi- 
gations covered the tracing of shipments, retail methods and costs, market prefer- 
ences, grades, effect of inferior grades, shipment under ventilation and refrigeration, 
grade and package laws, cold-storage holdings and movement. Pacific Northwest 
apples via the Panama Canal, and export markets. 22 pages and charts. 

U. S. D. A. Markets Doc. 13, issued July 15, 1918, by H. J. Ramsey, describes the 
methods of shipping and the effect of heavy loading of freight cars in the transportation 
of northwestern apples upon temperature, ventilation, condition, breakage, and 
distribution during the season of 1917-18. 23 pages. 

Publications Concerned with Vegetables. — U. S. D. A. Bulletin 290, dated Aug. 30, 
1915 by Wells A. Sherman, Paul Frochlich and Houston F. Walker, describes 
rail shipments and distribution of fresh tomatoes throughout the U. S. in 1914. The 
presentation covers field methods, areas of production, rate of shipments by states, 
shipping periods. 12 pages. 

Four bulletins are of interest to cantaloupe or muskmelon growers. These are 
U. S. D. A. Bulletin 315, Oct. 23, 1915 by Wells A. Sherman, A. Dextor Gail, Jr. and 
Faith L. Yeaw, Farmers' Bulletin 707, Feb. 2, 1916 by C. T. More and G. V. Branch; 
U. S. D. A. Bulletin 401, Oct. 31, 1916 by O. W. Schleussner and C. W. Kitcher; 
U. S. D. A. Doc. 10, June 1918 by A. W. McKay. 

Bulletin 315 discusses cantaloupe marketing in the larger cities east of the 
Mississippi River, during 1914, showing systems of distribution within cities, factors 
influencing prices, amount of shipment by States and districts, and shipping dates. 
19 pages and chart. 

Farmers' Bulletin 707 describes the commercial grading, packing grading and ship- 
ping, 23 pages. 

Bulletin 401 reports investigations of 1915 on: into the history, marketing arrange- 
ments, quality, and distribution of the cantaloupe districts of Imperial Valley and 
Turlock, California; Salt River Valley, Arizona; Moapa, Nevada; and Colorado. 38 
pages and several charts. 

Market Doc. 10 presents five findings in connection with loading and transporting 
of western cantaloupes, including considerations of mixed loading on refrigeration, 
temperatures in transit, floor racks, car construction, and insulation; use of salt in 
refrigeration, and handling of ventilators in transit. 16 pages. 

U. S. D. A. Farmers' Bulletin 753, dated Nov. 1, 1916, by C. T. More and C. R. 



516 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Dorland, discusses the commercial handling, grading and marketing of potatoes through- 
out the United States, including both early and late crops, standardization, digging, 
picking, grading and packing, containers, brands, loading, marketing, shrinkage and 
weig-hing. 40 pages and chart. 

Publications Concerned with Grain. — U. S. D. A. Bulletin 558, dated July 28, 
1917 by Geo. Livingston and K. B. Seeds, takes up findings in connection with the 
marketing of grain at country points, with discussions of methods of purchase and 
sale, prices, contracts, storage, weighing, and place, costs, hazards, and supply of 
country elevators. Of general application throughout the United States. 44 pages, 
price 5^. 

U. S. D. A. Bulletin 456, dated Feb. 5, 1917, by Roy C. Potts and H. F. Meyer, on 
the marketing of creamery butter, discusses importance of quality, kinds of packages, 
brands and trade-marks, methods of wholesale distribution, grading inspection, 
storage, quotations, advertising, and salesmanship. Of general interest. 37 pages, 
10^. 

U. S. D. A. Bulletin 690, dated July 23, 1918, by Roy C. Potts, discusses, in the 
interest of dairymen, creamerymen, and consumers, marketing practices of Wisconsin 
and Minnesota creameries, to show factors influencing marketing, buying policies 
and methods, transporting, weighing, and distributing. 15 pages. 

Publications Concerned with Methods. — U. S. D. A. Bulletin 266, dated Aug. 16, 
1915, by J. W. Fisher, Jr., J. G. Collins and Wells A. Sherman, presents definite in- 
formation on finding a market, use of quotations, advertising, business responsibility; 
primary outlets for producers such as cooperative associations, direct sales to con- 
sumers, sales through middle men; and general sales practices and terms. A pre- 
sentation of how commodities are marketed, where to find a market, how to ship, 
and how the producer can protect himself. 27 pages. 

U. S. D. A. Bulletin 267, dated Aug. 16, 1915, by J. H. Collins, J. W. Fisher, Jr. 
and Wells A. Sherman, presents details of the present methods of wholesale distribution 
of fruits and vegetables on large markets by reviewing necessity for distributing 
agencies, methods of receiving products, terminal distribution, and sales methods. 
Of general interest in studying present market conditions. 27 pages. 

The parcel post as a means of marketing farm products is discussed in U. S. D. A. 
Farmers' Bulletin 703, Jan. 14, 1916, by Lewis B. Flohr, and C. T. More. An informa- 
tion bulletin for seller and buyer, with suggestions on the use of this method of 
marketing, 19 pages. 

U. S. D. A. Farmers' Bulletin 830, Aug., 1917, by Lewis B. Flohr, on marketing eggs 
by parcel post. 23 pages. 

U. S. D. A. Farmers' Bulletin 922, Feb. 1918, by C. C. Hawbaker and John W. Law, 
on business methods in connection with marketing by parcel post, 19 pages. 

U. S. D. A. Bulletin 688, May 18, 1918, by C. C. Hawbaker and Charles A. Bur- 
meister on the use of parcel post for marketing berries and cherries. 17 pages. 

State inquiries into marketing have thus far not resulted in any extensive output 
of literature, although many Agricultural Colleges and Universities have worked on 
the problem, and, according to a report of the federal Office of Markets and Rural 
Organization, certain states have official marketing departments created by legis- 
lative act, and especiallj^ charged with regulating or investigational duties in con- 
nection with the marketing of farm products. At the time of the report* these states 
were Alabama, California, Idaho, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, 
North Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Virginia and West Virginia. Massachusetts and 
Oklahoma may possibly now be added to the list. 

*For details and description of scope and duties see Market Document 3 of the 
Federal Office of Markets and Rural Organization issued June 5, 1916. 



CHAPTER XXII 
FARM LABOR 

In the scheme of agricultural endeavor proper organization of the 
farm work is very important. Given good soil, fine growing conditions, 
a receptive market, nevertheless if the work is not organized these will 
amount to little. Organization extends first to the farm work to be 
done, and, second, to the men who are to do the work. On a small 
place — so small that only one man is required to carry it on — organization 
of work is easy to understand and to accomplish. In many industries 
the work is automatically regulated by the demands of the crops or the 
stock. In the dairy, for instance, milking must be done at uniform and 
proper intervals, while feeding must be regular in point of time and suit- 
able in character. These point out the need for organizing the work; 
or to put it another way, the yield of milk will decrease if the cows are 
subjected to irregular treatment; thus proving the necessity for 
organization. 

Usually this simple form of organization requires no particular con- 
cern on the part of the man doing the work. 

The organization of men, however, is a different and difficult matter. 
Upon this one point alone hinges much of the success or failure of most 
men, especially salaried men who are managing properties. 

Each man can do but a certain amount of daily work, whether it be 
mental or physical. Beyond this he must call in others to help him ; and 
if his be the guiding hand, his success in getting the work done will be in 
direct proportion to his ability to get the best from his men. 

The Farm Management Aspect of Farm Labor. — Farm management 
is concerned with the supply of farm labor and the sources of this supply; 
wages and methods of payment; housing and boarding; laborers' privi- 
leges, such as the use of horses and vehicles, holidays, trips to town, access 
to papers and books; and with the social status and welfare of farm 
laborers from the standpoint of securing continued service from desirable 
men. 

It is important that the manager have accurate knowledge of the 
standards of farm labor. If both manager and laborer understand this 
matter, the management of labor is greatly simplified. Hence, in the 
management of labor it is well not only for the manager to inform him- 
self on this subject but to make use of such data on the subject as are 
available as a means of educating his laborers themselves concerning what 
may fairly be expected of them. No one has a moral right to demand that 

517 



518 FARM MANAGEMENT 

the laborers under his direction shall work at a rate that will impair 
working power, but with this limitation the manager has a right to expect 
the best service the laborer can give. 

Interest in Labor Depends on Viewpoint. — The intermingling of 
social and business relations involved in the hiring out to work or the 
employing of men for farm work has resulted in well defined points of view 
concerning the rights of labor and of employer. Occasionally a difference 
of opinion arises as to what constitutes the respective rights of each group, 
and then clashes occur. The situation sometimes results in efforts by 
employers to combine for the purpose of setting wage scales, or by workers 
to organize for their common good; sometimes the result sought is extreme, 
like the objective point of the Industrial Workers of the World; sometimes 
the end is only of minor importance, such as mutual agreement by 
employees upon a wage rate, or a standard of housing or board or 
social recognition. 

This difference in outlook makes difficult at times a clear understand- 
ing of how farmers and others view the labor situation. A farm manager 
soon finds some trouble in properly appraising all points of view. His 
problem will be clarified somewhat if he recognizes that personal interest 
is largely responsible for the individual's point of view. 

Five Points of View Concerning Farm Labor. — It is possible to 
recognize at least five points of view, depending on the contact of the 
individual : 

1. That of the large farm operator who hires all his farming done and 
makes his profit from the men that he employs. His business desire is to 
obtain plenty of labor and as cheaply as is consistent with the main- 
tenance of prices for farm products. From his point of view, competi- 
tion among laborers is desirable in so far as it results in greater ease 
in procuring men when wanted, less necessity for providing accommo- 
dations, and a reduction in the wage scale. 

2. That of the working farmer who does all his own work, and whose 
product, when placed on the market, comes into competition with pro- 
ducts of other farmers who, if they employ cheap labor, are able to sell at 
reduced prices and thus tend to reduce the income of the working farmer. 

3. That of the working farmer who, at times, is an employer, and as 
such occupies the complex position of desiring to get as much for his own 
labor as he can, and to hire at a price which will return to him as generous 
profit on the work of others as he is able to secure. 

4. That of the farm worker, whose main interests — wages, hours, 
board, housing, and supervision — are directly affected by an market in- 
crease or decrease in the total supply of or demand for farm labor. 

5. That of the members of the community, only indirectly in touch 
with the farm labor situation, other than as it affects the cost of living, 
but rather directly concerned with the influence of the type, numbers, and 



FARM LABOR 519 

ideals of a group the size of the farm labor group, in its relation to general 
public welfare. 

Conflicting Ideas Result from Different Viewpoints. — These views 
tend to summarize into three outstanding classifications which at times 
are rather definitely in conflict, (1) the worker's interest in his own wel- 
fare, (2) the profits to be made from labor — the private pocketbook point 
of view, and (3) the social welfare idea, including maintenance of 
American standards and ideals. 

Around these views are grouped the advocates and opponents of 
admission of labor from foreign countries — Europe, the Orient, Mexico; 
of I. W. W.'ism;ofanti-loafing or conscription legislation; of better distribu- 
tion and utilization of labor; and of better housing of labor. 

The Farm Manager's Responsibility and Viewpoint. — The true farm 
manager occupies a somewhat difficult position. He must recognize 
the need not only of maintaining Amercian standards but of continually 
striving for greater improvement; he must take proper care of his men 
without either smothering independence or furthering the spirit of taking 
advantage; he must show a profit for his year's operations, which is 
determined, to some extent, by his costs for man labor. 

To meet best these varied responsibilities, the gaining of an under- 
standing of the worker's requirements and a knowledge of how successful 
employers handle their men will constitute his first steps. 

Classes of Farm Labor 

In the paragraphs to follow, an attempt has been made to indicate 
the laborer's more outstanding social or class traits — good and bad. In 
considering this presentation it should be borne in mind that the views 
are individually the author's, largely drawn from personal experiences and 
contacts, and that the gauges of measure are (1) desirability for farm work 
and (2) the American standards of living and working. 

White Laborers. — The best general laborers the farmer can get are 
the Irish, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, Germans, Poles, and Austrians, 
when the natives or descendants of these nationalities come from 
good old farming stock. The men are as a rule steady, reliable, kind to 
stock, and familiar with farm operations. 

Unfortunately for the employer, perhaps, these men go into business 
for themselves as soon as they secure a little stake. 

Hobo or Tramp Laborers. — Hobo or tramp laborers, white, constitute 
a kind of labor upon which many farmers must rely when extra hands 
are needed. Usually such laborers are troublesome and unreliable. 
The men as a rule are drifters, seldom stay in one place for any length of 
time, are often trouble-makers, and usually feel themselves above their 
work. 



520 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Characteristics of Hobo or Tramp Laborers. — The majority falling into 
this category seem to be men who have descended to their homeless con- 
dition by reason of bad habits, improper living, or misfortune. Most of 
them are intelligent, a good many educated, and they do not as a rule 
take kindly to farm work, or to work of any kind, for that matter. At the 
best they are unstable, staying only a limited length of time, or until the 
spirit moves them and they are off. 

When the wanderlust is coming on, they are fidgety, fault-finding, and 
surly. 

Within this group not all men are equally capable. In fact, among 
the latter are many who may correctly be classed as "unemployables" — 
mentally defective or physically weak. Many of these men are in- 
capable of doing a reasonable day's work on any farm. It is these 
that largely make up the crowds hanging around poolrooms, saloons, 
and employment agencies, at least during times when help is scarce. 
This condition often leads to the belief that there is plenty of help. 
Experience in such instances has frequently proved, however, that 
only a small percentage of the men care to consider a farm job, many of 
them hanging around for something calling for but two or three hours' 
work at a small wage, while of those who will consider farm work only a 
few can be used to advantage. 

Handling Hobo or Tramp Laborers. — These men should be provided 
with a reasonably warm, dry place to sleep, but as a rule no special hous- 
ing is needed for them. They are satisfied to furnish their own bedding 
and sleep on a pile of hay, and to get plain food such as meat, beans, bread, 
potatoes, pie, plain cake, prunes, and boiled raisins, if ample in quantity 
and well cooked. 

As a class they are easily disgusted with poor machinery, and if an 
implement continually breaks, they are likely to quit without notice. 

Two or three weeks constitutes the average stay of the typical hobo, 
and ranches using this class of labor are subjected to a heavy turn-over 
which is seldom traceable to any fault of the ranch management. These 
men will not stand crowding or pressing. If any attempt is made to 
drive them they will quit. Yet they can be held to the daily quitting 
time, although if over-time or extra work is attempted, a clear under- 
standing must be had and extra money be paid. 

A good way is to give them a good idea of just what is wanted, and 
then to let them work it out in their own fashion. Ordinarily they are 
well acquainted with the kind of work they hire out to do, and can 
accomplish more if allowed to select the method. 

' This statement is not to be construed as suggesting that the men are 
to be left entirely alone. The foreman or operator should certainly 
drop around once in awhile and see how things are going. 

Sunday work is usually taboo with the real hobo. 



FARM LABOR 521 

One cannot afford to allow poker playing or gambling of any kind, or 
tolerate radical talk or preaching by discontented individuals. 

Italian and Portuguese Laborers. — In general these men exhibit 
more or less of traits in common when employed in agricultural pursuits. 
They make some of the best ranch help now available. They are pretty 
fair in handling stock, and seem to have an inborn love of farming. 

Characteristics of Italiayi and Portuguese Laborers. — As a rule they are 
rather sensitive and inclined to be emphatic in their likes and dislikes. 
They won't tolerate abusive treatment. When a new foreman is placed 
over them, they are likely to line up, look him over, and if the decision 
is adverse, to walk off in a body. 

Once the employer secures their respect and esteem, they will work 
well and steadily. They will answer emergency calls to lend a hand 
either day or night. They require careful handling, and not every fore- 
man is so gifted that he can make a success with them. 

It is interesting to view the expanding of immigrants of these races. 
First of all they are entirely happy just to be alive and out in the open. 
They will work with crowbar, shovel, or pitch fork. Then they want 
to drive a horse — as in the barn dump cart, then they want a pair, until 
finally with eight or more head strung out in front of them, they feel 
themselves duly accredited citizens. 

Negro Laborers. — The colored man — the mainstay of southern 
farming — is characterized as home-loving, peaceable, easy going, gregari- 
ous, sometimes shiftless, always good natured and affable. Negro labor 
characteristics are pretty generally the same throughout the South, 
although they vary greatly as to individuals. Men, women, and children 
all work, many of the men being exceptionally well developed physically. 
Greatest success is attained in the use of this labor when they are in suffi- 
cient numbers to insure companionship and to justify cabins separate 
from the main farm buildings. These people are good hand workers, 
e.g., in hoeing, planting, weeding, clearing land. They take readily to 
handling horses and mules. Their best work is done in the warmer 
sections, as they dislike the colder climates and higher altitudes. They 
are careless about store accounts, are inveterate "borrowers," and are 
neither frugal nor saving — a few dollars being a sufficient excuse for 
knocking off work until the accumulation is spent. Employers strive 
to prevent too long periods of inactivity by systemically encouraging 
spending for good food, fine clothes, phonographs, automobiles, and 
jewelry, utilizing the part payment plan for the more expensive items. 

Haridling Negro Laborers. — Negroes are not difficult to handle by men 
who are used to them and their ways. 

Northern men occasionally acquire the knack of handling the typical 
Southern negro, but to learn it calls for 2 or 3 years experience and possibly 
costs the one who attempts it some money. The negro of the northern 



522 FARM MANAGEMENT 

and western States is easier to deal with. But all require much patience, 
as they are careless in reporting broken machinery, are notorious prevari- 
cators, and constantly annex to themselves such minor things as chickens, 
lines from harness, axes, shovels, etc. Yet they can be absolutely trusted 
when sent on a definite errand, even though large sums of money are 
involved. To a man who gains his conffdence the negro is faithful 
and loyal in the extreme. They are keen, shrewd students of human 
nature and always find the weak points in their employer's make-up. 

Elements of success in handling are to: (a) have very little to do with 
the men other than to outline the work and see that it is carried out ; (6) 
assign a stated amount of work for the day and when completed call it a 
day, letting the worker have any extra hour or two to himself, for the 
negro works better for this "tasking" him, or setting a job, than by set 
hours; (c) bluntly criticize unsatisfactory work; (d) be not over-apprecia- 
tive, although an occasional word of commendation is desirable; (e) keep 
faith at all times. Being erratic, irregular workers, they require 
time off now and then to garden and raise chickens for themselves, or to 
go to funerals and festivities. The negro will also be faithful to his 
employer's " kin folks." Many of them are slow and inclined to loaf, 
but for people raised with them, or who understand them, they are 
good workers when kept under proper supervision. 

Mexican Laborers. — The common Mexican peon or laborer is usually 
a peaceful, somewhat childish, rather lazy, unambitious, fairly faithful 
person. He occasionally needs to be stirred up to get him to work, but if 
treated fairly he will work faithfully. 

Mexican labor is limited to the warmer sections. In the southwest 
Mexicans are extensively relied upon to supply cheap hand labor. The 
Mexicans are as a rule a clannish, self-effacing people. When held in 
not too large numbers or worked in competition with other races, they 
prove willing and fairly reliable help. 

Of the two classes, resident and transient, the former is more desirable 
for farm work. Mexicans as a race can do practically anything, as 
thinning sugar beets, teaming, range riding, pick and shovel work, fruit 
picking and handling, cutting corn, etc. They are fairly good with 
machines but are not particularly adept at milking or handling complicated 
machinery. 

Handling Mexican Laborers. — Mexicans should be kept in living 
quarters by themselves apart from other workers. If the men are single, 
or not accompanied by their families, one big room can be provided where 
they can all eat, visit, and sleep. 

Unless one is able to speak their language, it is usually necessary to use 
one of their countrymen as a working foreman. If the men are handled 
in gangs, they should be accompanied by a pace-maker or strawboss at 
all times. In making decisions and in giving orders, the man in charge 



FARM LABOR 523 

of Mexicans must be courteous, but positive and firm; the Mexican, is 
like the Latin races, in that he appreciates courtesy. 

Success in deahng with Mexicans involves (a) patience — with them 
and their work; (6) encouraging marriage; (c) letting them live on the 
farm or in the neighborhood where they can fix up little homes of their 
own, given them for nominal rent, including the use of enough land for 
garden, chickens, and cow; {d) showing no partiality; (e) refraining from 
intimacy and unnecessary visiting, though an occasional pleasant word 
helps if given without creating familiarity; (/) recognizing that if one is 
discharged, the rest of the crew are likely to walk off in a body; {g) work- 
ing men individually as much as possible, rather than in gangs; {h) ar- 
ranging for contract or piece work when practicable and if understood by 
the men, rather than by day labor. 

Indian Laborers. — As a general rule Indians are satisfactory team- 
sters and harvest hands. They are much sought after where available. 
The number is, however, Hmited. The full-blood Indians are usually to 
be preferred to the halfbreeds. 

Indians as a rule are not particularly steady, but given a manager 
they like, they will prove to be faithful, loyal, and willing. 

Japanese Laborers. — The Japanese are good hand workers, especially 
at squat labor such as cutting asparagus, truck gardening, berry growing, 
sugar beet thinning and topping, melon picking, gathering walnuts, and 
for picking, sorting, and packing of various deciduous and citrus fruits. 
They are not mechanically inclined, and only occasionally satisfactory 
as teamsters. Japanese are seldom found in dairies, or on beef or sheep 
ranges, and only occasionally in the production of such field crops as 
barley, wheat, oats, cotton and alfalfa. 

Their specialty runs largely to the production of fruits, melons, rice, 
sugar beets, beans, corn, potatoes and truck crops. 

As a class they are ambitious, studious (often studying deep into the 
night after a hard day), cleanly, self-effacing, and law abiding. 

The business standards of the Japanese differ considerably from those 
of Americans. Hence, the Japanese does not feel compelled to respect 
his agreements if able to force a change more advantageous to himself. 
From Amerian standpoints they are therefore sometimes tricky in regard 
to contracts, as for example in failing to remove stumps under a wood- 
cutting contract, or in seeking to fulfill the terms of an agreement with 
scant weights or measures. Where Japanese of both sexes are present 
in numbers, their personal habits are likely to be open to American 
criticism. 

Handling Japanese Laborers. — The first essential of success in handling 
Japanese is clean quarters, not necessarily elaborate but where they can 
be by themselves. Such quarters should furnish facihties for cooking and 
living, and for heating water for tub bathing. They should be allowed 



524 FARM MANAGEMENT 

to prepare their food in their own way and by one of their people 
of their choice. The men can be worked individually or in gangs, 
but best results follow the practice of paying for their labor by piece 
work or contract, rather than by the day. As a guarantee to insure 
faithful performance of the entire contract, provision should be made 
when starting a piece of work to hold back a portion of their pay 
pending the completion of the job. 

Unless the men understand English it is necessary to deal with them 
through a Japanese foreman, to whom orders are given for the entire 
crew. The American almost never understands their language and so is at 
a disadvantage if he tries to deal directly with individuals of a large crew, 
since many of them can not, or will not, understand orders given in English. 

Japanese work best in their own way and if they know how to do 
certain work, they should be given an opportunity to do it by whatever 
method they are used to pursuing. 

Hindu Laborers.^ — Hindu laborers — of whom there are several sorts — 
do not appeal as overly desirable help. By Hindus is here implied any 
native of British India. In their lean, lanky, enervated condition they 
lack muscle, will power, and energy. They seem willing, try fairly 
hard, and under present labor conditions are useful in beet, celery, rice, 
and other work where hand labor is needed in abundance. 

The squalid and dirty living arrangements of the Hindus are particu- 
larly open to objection. 

When a choice is possible, the Mohammedans are preferred to the 
other natives of India. 

Chinese Laborers. — Chinese labor is now largely a thing of the past. 
A few old men still work in the potato and sugar beet fields and at vege- 
table gardening, but they are fast dying off. The young native born 
Chinese prefer the store or the kitchen. Chinese labor is no longer a 
factor with the American farmer, outside of a few cooks, gardeners, and 
houseboys. 

Chinese labor as a rule is slow in motion, but very reliable and trust- 
worthy. The Chinese takes a pride in his work and in fulfilling his con- 
tracts. He is set in his ways, however, and when taught a certain way 
to do a thing will continue to follow the method ever after. 

Handling Chinese Laborers. — The Chinese are content with much to 
do and Httle to say. They work well in groups. The Chinese respect 
seniority among themselves, and the oldest Chinese is looked up to by the 
younger as guide and advisor, so that it is well to put this man in charge 
of a crew and to give orders only through him, letting him split the crew 
and assign jobs as he sees fit. Usually, if working in pairs, men of about 
the same ages work together — never a young man and an old one in the 
same team. For the sake of reducing friction, and possibly worse, 



FARM LABOR ' 525 

Chinese crews should be composed of men belonging to the same "tong" 
or to friendly tongs. 

Kind of Help Needed by Farmers 
The kind of help nedeed by the individual farmer depends on the 
character of his operations. 

The general farmer needs steady, year-round men willing and able to do the 
variety of work incident to the production of stock and crops, to be supplemented in 
times of harvest or other "peak load" needs by additional hands for temporary use. 
The farmer tending toward specialization, like dairying, fruit raising, sugar beet 
production, or field crops such as grain or hay or beans, requires a type of labor able 
to do just the kind of work necessary to successful production in his particular industry. 

A dairyman wants men all the year who are able and willing to be on hand twice 
a day at 12-hr. intervals, milk 20 to 30 cows, and possibly feed in the barns and clean 
out the milking sheds. An alfalfa hay producer wants husky men during the harvest 
season who can handle teams in mowing and raking, lend a hand at cocking, hauling, 
and stacking, and irrigate between cuttings. A grain grower requires men for the 
definite periods of putting in a crop. He then has an interval with no work until the 
hay or grain harvest starts. If harvesting is done by contract, the grower's interest 
in labor ceases with the hauling off of the crop and its safe delivery to car or warehouse. 
The fruit grower needs additional help for any work he can not do himself. On small 
acreages, this means extra help only at harvest — to gather the fruit and prepare it 
for sale or for drying — and in some cases at pruning time. The man operating an 
extensive acreage of fruit does little more than supervise the work, and in addition 
to harvest hands needs men to prune, spray, cultivate, and irrigate. Even among the 
fruit men a difference exists in the kinds of usable labor. For picking up prunes or 
walnuts, any labor can be utilized and so school children, Indians, and whole families 
of unskilled and inexperienced people are found to be satisfactory. For picking pears, 
or apples, or peaches, to be prepared for shipment, only experienced, skilled help is 
profitable. Spraying can be done with any good worker, but pruning demands men 
who understand the principles involved. Irrigating requires men who know how to 
apply water properly; it can not be done to advantage by inexperienced hands. The 
poultry man wants help that understands poultry feeding, sanitation, breeding, and 
preparation of poultry products for marketing. This work consists of much detail 
and requires a man who not only can do the work but is quiet and gentle with the 
fowls. The sugar beet grower requires men able to do the hard, monotonous, back- 
breaking work of thinning the growing plants, and pulling and topping the mature 
crop to prepare it for shipment. 

All this shows what a great variety of men is needed to meet all farm 
needs. Agriculture as it stands today represents the cosmopolitan effort 
of representatives of many nations, so many in fact that to list them would 
include almost all that have experienced much emigration — China, 
France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Portugal, Russia, Sweden, 
and on around the globe. 

Classification of Farmers' Labor Needs. — Farmers' needs, although 
diverse in the extreme to meet individual requirements, tend to fall into 
three general classes : 

1. Experienced Unskilled Help. — Experienced unskilled men needed 
for the hard, tedious, back-breaking work which Americans can not 



526 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



generally be obtained to do under prevailing wages and other conditions; 
e.g., asparagus cutting, onion work, sugar beet thinning and topping, 
hoeing beans, digging potatoes, and cotton and cantaloupe picking. 

2. Experienced Skilled Help. — Experienced skilled men able to do 
farm work without special direction, such as milking, handling teams, 
running machinery (e.g., mowers, binders, harvesters, tractors, engines), 
range riding, heavy work as bucking sacks and stacking hay, and special 
work like pruning and spraying trees, building fences, and picking certain 
fruits requiring judgment. 

3. Unskilled, Inexperienced Help. — Unskilled inexperienced people 
suited to some of the more simple operations such as picking up prunes and 
walnuts, hoeing weeds, cultivating growing crops, and picking certain 
fruits, work that requires little or no judgment. 

In times of stress or scarcity of farm help, the greatest difficulty lies 
in meeting the need of the first class, and the least in taking care of the 
work that the third class can do. 

Transient and Seasonal Labor Needs. — A farm manager operating 
with specialized crops, requiring large numbers of men, must give special 
thought and effort to insure a sufficient supply of labor at the time when 
it is needed. A study of seasonal needs and available supplies should 
early take place. 

Periods of Seasonal Labor Needs. — Examples of seasonal needs are 
easy to find. For instance, the following table shows the period of great- 
est need for selected industries (California) :^^® 



Table 229. — Periods of Seasonal Labor Needs, California 



Industry 


Locality 


Greatest period of needs 


Grain planting. 


Central California 


Decern ber-Janu ary 
June 15— August 15 


Grain harvest ; . . . 


Central California 


Cutting asparagus 


Stockton delta 


May 15- July 1 


Cantaloupe harvest 


Imperial Valley 


May and June 


Sugar beet thinning 


Southern California 


February and March 


Sugar beet harvest 


Southern California 


August and September 


Sugar beet thinning 


Northern California 


March and April 


Sugar beet harvest 


Northern California 


September 


Cotton chopping 


Imperial Valley 


May 


Cotton picking 


Imperial Valley 


November and December 


Egyptain corn harvest 


San Joaquin and Sacra- 






mento Valley 


September 


Alfalfa hay harvest 


San Joaquin and' Sacra- 






mento Valley 


April to October inc. 


Pruning fruit trees (decid- 






uous) 




January and February 


Harvesting fruit crops (decid- 






uous) . 




August and September 







FARM LABOR 



527 



Amount of Seasonal Labor Needs. — The following table shows some- 
thing of the variable need. This need can not be accurately predicted 
in advance, because no one can foretell the influence of drought, rain, or 
hot or cold weather advancing or retarding the period harvest. 

Table 230. — Amounts of Seasonal Labor Needs 



Industry 



Acreage 



Number men 
required 



Length of sea- 
son in normal 
year for given 
field 



Hops 

Asparagus 

Sugar beet thinning 

Sugar beet harvest 

Picking up prunes (.3 pickings).. 

Picking pears 

Picking raisin grapes 

Cutting Egyptian corn 

Picking cotton 

Digging potatoes 



100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 



200-300 
20-30 
20-30 
10-20 

7-10 
30-100 

8-20 

7-12 
10-15 

&-3.5 



3-4 weeks 
6-8 weeks 
2-3 weeks 
3-4 weeks 
4-6 weeks 
2-3 weeks 
3-4 weeks 
2-4 weeks 
2-3 months 
3-8 weeks 



The Worker's Viewpoint 

To handle farm labor successfully, one must understand the worker's 
state of mind toward the conditions under which he is to labor. Usually 
six factors are vital to the farmhand, and the length of time that he re- 
mains, and the faithfulness with which he performs his duties, are in 
direct ratio to the degree of perfection attained in providing these six. 
They are (1) working conditions such as heat, dust, rains, isolation, cold 
weather, snows, remoteness, risk, kind of work stock and implements, 
etc., (2) working hours, (3) board, (4) lodging, (5) wages, (6) treatment by 
foreman or farmer. No attempt has been made to give these in order of 
their relative importance, as the listing varies considerably with the indi- 
vidual. A seventh — opportunity for advancement — is becoming more 
and more vital, and, if good men are to be retained on the farms, this 
factor must receive more attention in the immediate future. Young 
men of ambition may consider wages and advancement as first in impor- 
tance; hoboes consider board and hours as paramount; negroes and Mexi- 
cans place treatment by foremen well to the front ; mg,rried men center 
on housing and wages. 

Of late years, because of shortage of farm labor and need of 
increased food production, considerable attention has been drawn to these 
requirements. 

Student Experiences Indicate the Worker's Viewpoint. — To see how 
it works in any State, an investigation might follow the plan of the author, 



528 FARM MANAGEMENT 

who, by means of classes in farm management, has drawn for several 
years upon the California experiences of students employed in farm and 
ranch work. To these young men, intelligent, of impressionable age, 
reasonably unbiased, quick to observe, and keen to judge, were put ques- 
tions concerning working hours, board, housing, wages, and supervision 
as they had found them. 

Student Experiences as Farm Laborers. — A recent California com- 
pilation resulted in enough data to give a good cross-section of conditions 
in this State. They summed up as follows : 

Table 231. — Student Findings as Farm Laborers 

Percentage finding satisfactory 

Working hours: 

Satisfactory 57 | 

Too long 8 [ 88 

Too short j 

Board : 

Satisfactory 40 | 

Fair 17 [ 55 

Poor 16 J 

Housing : 

Satisfactory 28 1 

Fair 16 39 

Poor 28 ) 

Supervision: 

Satisfactory 48 

Fair 12 66% 

Poor 12 I 

Wages : 

Satisfactory 27 

Fair 13 59 

Too low 6 J 

This table certainly shows that there are grounds for improvement 
where these students went. And yet many statements, frequently made 
by uninformed or misinformed people, are not founded on facts, as the 
oft repeated sentiment to the effect that if farmers would pay living 
wages or provide decent living or proper board they would have no trouble 
in getting men. There are grounds for complaint concerning treatment 
of men, but a sweeping statement is a distortion of fact. That there 
is room for a clearer sense of individual responsibility on the part of 
the farmer towards labor is apparently offset by the need for a feeling 
of responsibility towards his work on the part of the laborer. 

Student Adverse Comments. — Sometimes humorous, always interest- 
ing, certain student accounts of bad conditions may serve to point the 
desirability of a little study of local conditions to find out what can be 
done in the way of bettering them.* 

* These portray California experiences. 



FARM LABOR 529 

Student Adverse Comments on Board. — Case I. — "The food was exceedingly plain 
and served only in moderate amounts and with very little variety." 

Case II. — "The food was very inferior. The milk was skimmed, flavored mainly 
by the drowned flies contained therein. Steaks were the cook's specialty. If they 
were placed on the railroad track, they would wreck the fastest train known. They 
were certainly first-class material for making saddles. Every time I think of Hing 
Loo, I lose my appetite." 

Case III. — "Food was at times very bad. There was always plenty but the 
cooking was often very bad. The cook would become very lazy at regular intervals 
and the food would be correspondingly bad. Every now and then, the man in charge 
of the cookhouse would go after the cook and for a short time the meals would be good. 
However, as a rule, the food was very poorly cooked and at times not fit for hogs to 
eat." 

Case IV. — "Food was not very good, that is, not well cooked and was too small 
in quantity. If you sometimes came late to the table you might, many times, not 
get enough to eat." 

Case V. — "The board on the first ranch was none too good, the food sometimes 
half cooked and often too dirty to enjoy eating. The main objection or complaint 
was the food taken to the men in the field that were working too far to come to camp. 
This always consisted of a dry piece of meat left from the day before and some dry 
bread, a piece of pie; all of which was usually flavored with coffee which had been 
tipped over in the pail." 

Student Adverse Comments on Working Hours. Case I. — "Working hours were 
long. Feed and harness team between 5 and 6 in the morning, going to the field at 
6.30 or 7, leaving the field at 12 for noon and starting back at I, then leaving field 
at 6 and take care of team after reaching the barn. The distance to and from work 
made the day longer than hours as given indicate." 

Case II. — "I was milking a string of cows besides doing a good day's work picking 
apricots." 

Case III. — "The day's work was the usual 8-hr. day of the farmer, (in baling hay), 
namely 8 hr. in the forenoon and 8 hr. in the afternoon." 

Case IV. — "I struck a wonderful working proposition one fine July. The most 
conspicuous thing about the job was the hours, for the twentieth century, arising 
at 4.45 a.m., milking cows and separating the milk, breakfast, working in hay until 
noon, then more hay work from 1 to 6 p.m. The boss milked the cows at night." • 

Case V. — "The hours were very long, beginning at 3.45 a.m. and finishing at 6 
p.m." 

Student Adverse Comments on Living Conditions. Case I. — "The living quarters 
were rather poor and the beds had bedbugs. I slept in an old wagon filled with straw, 
using a couple of my own blankets." 

Case II. — "A 'berth in the Pullman' consisted of a four-posted arrangement filled 
with straw, bedbugs and fleas, mostly bedbugs. They would hide in the stalks by 
day and crawl out of their shell per p.m. and attack their most beloved enemy." 

Case III. — "Upon our arrival in the evening we were shown the bunk-house and 
told that the 'feathers were in the barn.' We were told to come in to supper with the 
men at 6 o'clock. 

"Living quarters were very disreputable — dirty, dusty, and full of fleas and bed- 
bugs, etc. Another man and I came to work at the same time and after one super- 
ficial glance at the sleeping quarters we decided to sleep outside under a tree on a pile 
of hay. Within a week, nine other men had moved out of the bunk-house and fol- 
lowed our example of sleeping under the stars." 

Case IV. — "The living quarters were a fright. They were low, dingy old shacks 
full of dirt, old shoes and clothes, and specked with chicken droppings where the 
34 



530 FARM MANAGEMENT 

chickens had roamed or roosted. The place seemed aUve with insects and germs. 
I immediately asked permission to sleep on a haystack nearby, since I had my own 
blankets together with my belongings, which were wrapped in a large red handker- 
chief. This I called home except when a thunder shower came along, when the 
haywagon furnished some covering." 

Student Adverse Comments on Supervision. Case I. — "In my opinion, the men 
on the ranch were not handled very well and, although we were all driven, we didn't 
give as much as we would under a more congenial management. The way this fore- 
man handled us sure showed that men can't be driven and I believe more could have 
been received from the men had he been a Uttle more 'one of us' and not been such a 
'slave driver.' " 

Case II. — "The foreman was very severe and overbearing, but I ignored him, 
since all that I wanted was experience, and, believe me, I got it. I was sent down 
well-pits, 100 ft. in depth, in mud up to my waist, to examine leaks. On windy days, 
I was sent to the top of old windmills about 50 ft. in height to dismantle the upper- 
most machinery. He never had a word of encouragement or a smile upon his 
countenance." 

Case III. — "No one ever interfered with the men when they were at work. The 
work was never found fault with nor was the work ever commended. A man 
might work extra hard in order to finish a job up in a hurry or else take extra pains 
with the work. However, neither the foreman nor the superintendent would ever say 
a word about the work to anyone. The same apphes to work done carefully, as well as 
work done in a sloppy and careless manner. His orders were usually very short and 
indefinite. He would seem to take it for granted that the workman could read his 
mind and could tell exactly where and what was to be done from a very few indefinite 
orders." 

Case IV. — "When I first landed on the job, the farmer walked about the place 
with me, talking incessantly and telling me he had changed the place from a desert 
to its present state. From that time on, he never acted as friendly except on days 
when he had been 'in town.' 

"He generally set us to work on new jobs in the morning after breakfast. His 
directions were brief but usually very indefinite, so that we often worked quit« a 
while without being sure that we were doing the work to suit him, as for instance: 
'You fellows can go to work on that ditch on the last forty. Take four mules with you. 
It's the old ditch running past the potato patch.' With that he was off with a bang, 
and seldom spoke of the work until we came in with the implements. He never tried 
to hurry us and even when the work was piling up he seemed to have all the time in 
the world." 

Case V. — "On this ranch of about 800 acres in fruit there is one foreman who is 
both superintendent and foreman. There is not a regular bookkeeper so he has that 
to do. You see that from the start mismanagement is the cause of. the trouble. 
"I know that half the time he will send a man out with a team to do some work and 
never come near him during the day or maybe not at all while he is doing the whole 
job. I have seen men on the ranch lay down in the shade and sleep an hour or two 
in the forenoon and come back and do the same thing in the afternoon. The men 
never make another round after 11 o'clock or after 5 o'clock in the evening. It is 
no wonder that they do not complain of hours or wages. 

"The whole trouble I think lies with the two owners who think it pays to try to 
get something done for nothing and from what I have seen of this place I have come 
to the conclusion that it is the most expensive in the long run." 



FARM LABOR 531 

What Constitutes Good Working Conditions? 

In holding and handling help, and making a profit therefrom, so much 
depends upon proper provision of board and lodging, payment of fair 
wages, right length of working day, and manner of supervision, that a 
discussion of what is being done, or can be done, may not be out of place. 

Working Hours. — Statistics, complied by the U. S. D. A. Bureau of 
Statistics, averaged for the United States, show the average farm work 
day for the different seasons to be: 

United States Hours Minutes 

Spring 9 54 

Summer 10 54 

Fall 9 52 

Winter • .. 8 33 

Yearly average : . . . 9 48 

The hours of farm labor range very close to 10 per day. The length 
of the day varies of course with the season. Rush work means longer 
]>ours, while winter means less daylight and hence shorter working days. 

The average ranch day — 10 hr. — is neither too short nor too long for 
the variety and kind of field work to be done on the farm. Research 
has unearthed nothing to show what is the ideal length of day for the 
greatest efficiency, but with the kind of labor available, accustomed to a 
given pace, there is no need to suggest a change in the average farm 
day. While general practice indicates the 10-hr. day as a limit, it can not 
absolutely be so, since the very nature of farm work, quite apart from 
seasonal changes that necessitate a great rush at certain times {e.g., 
premature ripening of fruit or threatening weather in hay making) forbids 
rigid regulations. The big farms and ranches are about equally divided 
between 9 hr. and 10 hr. as constituting a standard day; on the small 
farms, the hours are not definite or so nearly standardized. There is 
more danger of the working owner's trying to crowd his labor unfairly 
than where paid foremen direct the men. 

Apparently a logical plan is to arise at 6, go to work at 7, provide an 
hour off at noon, and quit at 6 (or at dark during the winter months). 
This arrangement nieans that the evening meal is over by 7. Two or 
three hours still remain for recreation, card playing, reading and writing, 
leaving 8 hr. for sleep. 

No Sunday labor should be demanded other than that absolutely 
necessary. 

Boarding the Men. — A good deal of confusion exists in the minds of 
many farm managers as to how well they must feed their men and how 
well they can afford to feed them. The matter, however, can be easily 
determined for any place, no matter whether a few or many men are 
employed. Since the men's board must be considered a portion of the 



532 FARM MANAGEMENT 

wages paid, any reduction in the character of the board will be equivalent 
to a reduction in the men's wages. One will find out pretty quickly 
that this is the way the men view the matter. 

Plai7i Cooking. — The men prefer plain cooking, but they want clean 
food and plenty of it. A little experience in this line is worth more than 
a whole lot of advice. 

Catering a7id Tastes. — Different classes of men desire different kinds 
of food. 

The Italian, for instance, is satisfied with plenty of soup, bread, macaroni, spa- 
ghetti, and green vegetables, especially onions. The American wants plenty of meat, 
potatoes, desserts, tea, and coffee. The Mexican is very fond of green vegetables, 
beans, bread, and salads. The cooking should therefore appeal to the class of men 
employed. 

Cost of Meat. — Of the different kinds of food stuffs, meat is the most 
expensive. For 2,600 men worked by one concern, the monthly meat 
bill was between $12,000 and $14,000. No single item runs into money 
so fast as meat. And yet meat is necessary to secure best results from 
men. 

Substitutes for Meat. — Possible substitutes for meat are milk, butter, 
and eggs. Eggs at certain times of the year may prove cheaper than 
meat, while milk should be supplied in quantity sufficient for drinking. 
The use of butter, while a costly item of food, helps to vary the diet. 

Another substitute for fresh meat is available in packing-house by- 
products. The men welcome an occasional change to sausage, head cheese, 
and pickled pigs-feet, salt pork, lambs' tongue, hog jowls, corned beef, 
and the like. 

Use of Vegetables. — Vegetables should be served in abundance and 
variety, both cooked and as salads. If it is not possible to grow them, 
they should be purchased. They possess certain necessary conditioning 
properties and provide also the kind of food materials necessary for 
hard work. 

Use of Fresh Fruits. — Fresh fruits are not generally eaten to any great 
extent by working men. Cantaloupes and watermelons are perhaps an 
exception. It pays, however, to give them all they will eat. 

Cooked fruits such as baked apples, apple sauce, dried prunes, 
apricots, peaches, apples are appreciated and should be supplied twice a 
day. 

Use of Preserved Fruits. — It does not pay to preserve fruits for the men 
except to be given as occasional delicacies or on state occasions. 

Good Board Necessary. — It pays to give good substantial board. 
Hard work calls for plenty of nourishing, wholesome, well-prepared food 
in variety sufficient to guard against cloyed appetites. A well-fed man 
is usually a contented man and therefprq a man easier to handle. 



FARM LABOR 533 

Kitchen Economies. — Many savings are possible in the kitchen by a 
little planning. Stewed meat is cheaper than roasts or fries. Careful 
saving of drippings from fat meats will cut down the lard and compound 
bills. Bread cut for the table means less waste than when put on in 
loaves. Pies cut before going on the table insure fairer distribution. 
Soups, hashes, and puddings utilize left-overs to good advantage. 

The board should be such as the men are used to. Foreign flavors 
and unfamiliar dishes should be avoided. 

Meals should be served at regular hours and promptly on time. 

The dining room should be kept free from flies, and all table covers, 
syrup holders, sugar bowls, etc. kept strictly clean and free from stickiness 
and dirt. 

The various foods should be served in large dishes, from which men 
are to help themselves. 

If the quality and quantity of the board doesn't suffer because of 
separation, men prefer a table, or better a room, by themselves. Family 
arguments and quarrels, and family discussions, are of little interest to 
outsiders. An arrangement by which the family is kept by itself is 
usually more satisfactory from all standpoints. 

When cattle or sheep outfits are in for camps, supply fruits, vegetables, 
etc., with caution, otherwise men may be discontented when such things 
must be again cut off. 

In general, the matter of boarding men is well worth all the study one 
can give to it, especially as the possibility of leaks is nowhere greater, 
in proportion to the expense involved, than in the kitchen. 

Example of Kitchen Supplies. — A western concern engaged in farming 
and stock raising, and having a monthly payroll averaging about 2,500 
men, has worked out four lists of supplies which will be furnished on req- 
uisition to the camp and ranch foremen. These lists represent about 
the minimum and should be interesting for comparison and suggestion. 

Table 232. — List of Supplies Issued to Ranch Camps — Cattle, Sheep, Hog, 
Plow, Scraper, Wood, etc., and Laborers' Tables 

Bacon (ranch) only when fresh meat supply is not available 

Baking powder 

Beans — pink 

Beans — white 

Beans — bayo 

Canned tomatoes (for soups only) 

Chili powder 

Codfish 

Coffee 

Compound (in small quantities) 

Corn meal 

Corn starch 

Cottonseed oil 



534 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 232. — {Continued). 

Cured meats, such as pure pork, pigs feet, tongue, hog jowls, and corned beef 

Dried fruit, in variety, i.e., apples, pears, apricots, peaches, prunes 

Extracts — lemon and vanilla 

Flour 

Garlic 

Ginger 

Hominy 

Macaroni 

Mustard 

Oats (rolled) 

Onions 

Pearl barley 

Pepper 

Pickles 

Pork (salt) 

Potatoes 

Raisins (small quantities) 

Rice 

Sage 

Sago 

Salt 

Soda (baking) 

Spaghetti 

Sugar 

Syrup 

Tapioca 

Tea 

Vinegar 

Yeast 

Table 233. — ^List No. 2: Supplies Issued for Foremens' Tables, Construc- 
tion AND Survey Camps 

The following additions to LIST No. 1 will be allowed: 

Butter (to be made on ranch, not purchased) 

Canned tomatoes 

Catsup 

Cocoanut 

Compound 

Corn starch 

Crackers 

Eggs (to be obtained on ranch, not purchased) 

Ham 

Milk (canned, where cows are not kept) 

Table 234. — List No. 3: Supplies Issued for Superintendents' and Clerks' 

Tables 

The following may be allowed in addition to Lists 1 and 2. 
Canned corn (in winter) 
Canned milk 
Canned tomatoes 
Chocolate — ^cooking 



FARM LABOR 535 

Table 234. — (Continued) 
Eggs 

Fruits in season (when supplied from ranches) 
Bacon 
Jello 
Jelly 
Lard 

Maple syrup 
Olive oil 

Oysters (canned) 
Sugar — lump 
Sugar powdered 
Worcestershire sauce 
(Purchase of canned fruits and canned vegetables other than those specified 

will not be allowed.) 
(Canned fruits should be put up on the ranches. Vegetables are to be grown on 

the ranches.) 

List No. 4 

Supplies issued to men traveling with cattle, horses, or other stock, from place to 

place : 
In addition to the articles in LIST No. 1 which can be transported, add: 
Bacon 

Canned corn 
Canned milk 
Canned tomatoes 
Cheese 
Ham 
Pickles 

Cost of Boarding Men. — Comparison of wages with and without board 
shows that the value of the board in money is, in general, equal to 43 per 
cent of the wages paid for labor without board to regular men and 22 per 
cent to transient labor, based on periods of work other than harvest.* 
The value of board supplied to workers should, then, reach this figure. 
It is commonly safe to figure at from 75f^ to $1.50 per day per man. This 
limit determines what one can afford to serve. It will eliminate such 
things as eggs in winter, butter for cooking purposes, chickens, and the 
fancier kinds of tinned stuff. It will, however, be sufficient to give the 
men a good variety of wholesome food, if properly prepared. 

The smaller the number of men to be fed, the greater will be the pro- 
rata cost, especially if it is necessary to hire a cook. As a rule, a man cook 
will handle up to 15 men without a helper, and up to 25 or 30 men with 
a "boy" to help him. The wages will be $75 to $125 and $60 to $100 per 
month for each. For 20 men or less, it is sometimes possible to hire a 
married couple, the woman to cook and the man to work as a stableman, 
as a hand, or even as a straw boss or foreman. Such couples command 
from $100 to $175 a month for the two, although experience indicates 
that the cheaper couples are less 'desirable. Best results follow paying 

* See table, page 540. 



536 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



the man wages for his work, and his wife extra for her cooking. The 
amount of wages a woman is entitled to depends on the number of men 
she cooks for, and this in turn depends entirely on her ability. There is 
no set rule. Some women can cook for only four or five men, others can 
handle a dozen. One basis is that service costs $7 per man. The first 
woman is then worth but $35, while the latter will work for $85. 

On the other hand, if one must keep a cook it is evident that consid- 
erable thought should be given to planning the work so that the cook 
will work to the best advantage at all times. That is, if a job can be 
handled as advantageously with 20 men as with 12, service will be 
■cheaper by keeping as many men as the cook can handle. Or, on the 
other hand, if the work will stand some prolonging, it may pay to cut 
down the crew to a point where they can be boarded at less expense. 

Keeping Track of Kitchen Costs and Practices. — Whatever system of 
boarding is followed, it is desirable to keep track of kitchen costs. This 
should be done by keeping a record of the cost of the food, whether sup- 
plied by the farm or purchased, the wages of the kitchen help, and the 
number of meals served. Then, in addition, frequent inspections should 
be made of the kitchen methods. The refuse barrel should be carefully 
watched, to check any extravagance on the part of the cook. A wasteful 
cook can equal his wages in throwing away things capable of being worked 
up into hash, stews, puddings, etc. 

Examples of Cost of Boarding Help. Studies of Cost of Board in 
10 States. — In a study in 10 typical States, the cost of board and lodging 
was found to be^" for the year 1913: 

Table 236. — Average Annual Cost of Food, Fuel, Oil, House Rent, and House 
Labor for Each Person in the Farm Family 



State 


Value of 


Total cost of 
board and lodg- 
ing 


Food 


Fuel 


Oil 


House 
rent 


House 
labor 


Annual 


Average 

per 
month 


North Carolina 


$ 89.32 
88.92 
92.30 
99.97 
105.67 
80.16 
91.07 
75.40 
94.08 
75.34 


$ 9.68 

9.56 

6.91 

6.89 

14.23 

13.53 

13.71 

8.83 

17.70 

13.83 


$0.69 
0.96 
1.43 
1.60 
1.31 
1.65 
1.19 
1.21 

. 1.45 
0.96 


$12 
17 
16 
26 
36 
31 
42 
31 
47 
19 


$34 
25 
41 
58 
64 
54 
49 
41 
56 
38 


$146 
141 
158 
192 
221 
180 
197 
157 
216 
147 


$12.18 


Georgia 


11.75 


Texas 


13.17 


Kansas 


16.00 


Iowa 


18.42 


Wisconsin 


15.00 


Ohio 


16.41 


Pennsylvania 


13.17 


New York 


18.00 


Vermont 


12.25 


Average 


$89 . 23 


$11.49 


$1.25 


$28 


$46 


$176 


$14.64 











FARM LABOR 



537 



Cost of Board — Minnesota. — A study covering 9 years (1905-1914) 
in Minnesota^* showed: 



Tai 


!LE 237.- 


—Yearly 


Cost of Board — Minnesota 








Yearly 


Cost per Person 








Year 


Food 


Labor 


Equip- 
ment 


Fuel 


Total 

without 

rent 


Rent 


Total 
cost 


1905 


$78.42 


$44.85 


$ 9.60 


$11.20 


$144.07 


$21.36 


$165.43 


1906 


73.83 


47.83 


9.32 


11.12 


142.12 


21.36 


163.48 


1907 


90.16 


54.02 


10.92 


12.19 


167.29 


21.36 


188.65 


1908 


77.61 


45.73 


7.94 


10.31 


141.59 


21.36 


162.95 


1909 


77.33 


44.89 


7.58 


13.54 


143.34 


21.36 


164.70 


1910 


84.44 


49.22 


8.16 


13.98 


155.80 


21.36 


177.16 


1911 


63.52 


47.04 


6.47 


10.75 


127.78 


21.36 


149.14 


1912 


66.25 


44.38 


6.17 


8.81 


125.61 


21.36 


146.97 


1913 


54.77 


46.89 


5.56 


6.12 


113.34 


21.36 


134.70 


1914 


61.85 


47.36 


6.17 


6.72 


122.10 


21.36 


143.46 


Average 


$74.96 


$46.62 


$ 8.17 


$11.01 


$140.76 


$21.36 


$162.12 



Housing Farm Help. — A better class of men can be secured and re- 
gained if the housing facilities are good. 

Housing Depends on Help Employed. — The type of bunk-house or 
rooming quarters depends on the kind of labor being employed. Good 
American laborers (including agricultural college students) are worthy of 
well constructed, separate rooms, clean showers and toilets, a reading 
room. 

Hoboes, on the other hand, are best cared for with some cheap shelter 
where they can ''flop." They are not particular as long as they 
keep dry and reasonably warm. 

Quarters provided for coolie, Oriental, negro, or Mexican labor 
are generally not suitable for men demanding American standards of 
living. This fact is especially worthy of attention in times of scarcity of 
labor whenever it becomes necessary and advisable to utilize men from 
cities or towns who, used to sanitary conveniences, some privacy, and 
reasonable facilities for recreation during hours off duty, will not submit 
to herding in common quarters. 

Putting many men together in one big room will work fairly well with 
foreign labor, as with Italians and some classes of native labor {e.g., 
hoboes or men temporarily out of funds), but it is not conducive to secur- 
ing or holding the best class of farm labor. Mexicans, negroes, Japanese, 
and labor of similar requirements, prefer little shacks or humble cottages 
off by themselves where they can bring their families and perfect their 
own living arrangements. 



538 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Use of Separate Rooms. — Where it can be done, the best arrangement 
consists in giving the men separate rooms, or at least putting not over 
two men in a room. This method necessitates more building accommoda- 
tion, but it pays in the long run. Men in a bunk-house consisting of one 
room used both for sleeping and recreation have no privacy. It is natural 
for the men to want to get together for amusement or sociability, and 
they should have a well ventilated, properly lighted room, with facilities 
for heating, where they can assemble. But the sleeping quarters had 
better be separated, where the men can retire early without being dis- 
turbed by others, or where they can read, shave, or write without dis- 
turbance. In hot countries, the use of summer sleeping porches is 
advisable. 

Condemn Poor Quarters. — There is no justification for the dirty, unsani- 
tary, poorly lighted, hot-in-summer, cold-in- winter shack hidden away 
back of the barn or beside the manure pile. 

Investigations tend to show that in many sections the housing of farm 
hands is unsatisfactory. This inadequacy is particularly well known to all 
those acquainted with western ranch life. 

Money spent in fixing up a comfortable, attractive place — based on 
the demands of the labor being employed — is well worth while. 

Limitations of Small Employer.— It should be recognized, however, 
that it is not always possible for the small employer to keep pace with the 
large employer in providing proper quarters. Fluctuating need of men, 
combined with the short period when rooming and cooking quarters are 
in use on many farms, explains why satisfactory living conditions, readily 
provided where labor is employed a large part of the year, are not feasible 
when a large army of help is needed for but a few days. Yet improve- 
ment even under these circumstances has been found possible, as for 
example by the cooperative maintenance of a central camp by several 
neighboring farmers or by a community. 

One must recognize, too, that the present housing and sanitary condi- 
tions in many communities are due to the kind of labor to be housed. 
Migratory labor has in the past been careless and even downright unap- 
preciative of attempts to provide more livable surroundings. Yet, if a 
better class of labor is to be attracted to many districts, more attention 
to good housing is imperative. A farmer must exert himself to differ- 
entiate between classes of labor and to provide conditions which will 
attract and hold the class wanted. 

Selection of Beds. — The matter of beds is important. For this pur- 
pose, the iron cot bed with woven wire springs, costing at wholesale 
about $3 or $4 each, is very desirable. They are easy to clean, long-lived, 
and neat in appearance. 

If bedding is furnished, mattresses costing not less than $2 each whole- 
sale should be furnished. Where the men furnish bedding, they should 



FARM LABOR 539 

also provide their own mattresses, since one man usually objects to 
sleeping on a mattress that has been used by some predecessor; or else 
ticking can be suppHed, sewed to shape, but so made that it can be 
emptied readily, washed, and refilled with straw or excelsior. Who 
shall supply the bedding is to be decided for each individual case, since it 
depends to a large extent upon the kind of man employed. 

If men are to do continuous hard work, they need good rest at night. 
Quiet, privacy, and a comfortable bed with ample bed clothes, will go 
far towards keeping an organization up to a high degree of efficiency, 
and, by keeping men contented, will tend to keep the men from going 
to town at night. 

Providing Lights. — Good lights should be provided for the living room 
especially during the winter months, for the men who like to read and 
write. 

Providing Lockers. — Lockers or clothes receptacles, each provided 
with a lock, if more than one man occupies the room, are necessary to 
the room equipment. 

Ventilation of Sleeping Quarters. — Ample ventilation of sleeping quar- 
ters should be insured by means of windows and eaves or gable openings. 
All windows, doors, and ventilator openings should be well screened. 

Washing Facilities. — Clean and sanitary facilities for washing, bath- 
ing, and cleaning clothes must be provided, and, if possible, hot water 
should be available on certain days or at stated hours. 

Showers with good drainage rather than bath tubs are preferred. 

During rainy or winter seasons, a suitable place for drying clothes is 
needed. 

Improving Quarters Helps Individual Employer. — It should be borne 
in mind, though, that improvement of quarters does not to any extent 
augment the available supply of labor. It merely aids the individual 
making the improvement to obtain and hold help in competition with 
other employers. Neither will it entirely eliminate the trouble of 
holding men under difficult conditions of dust, heat, isolation, or 
unattractive work. 

Better housing does not, as a rule, necessitate extensive or expensive 
alterations. Satisfactory structures can be erected for a very reasonable 
sum, and this expenditure is usually well worth while, especially with help 
ready to respond to good accommodations. 

Supervision of Farm Help. — Supervision refers to the directing and 
controlling of labor by the farmer, foreman, superintendent, or whoever 
comes in actual contact with the men. Successful supervision calls for 
more than passing attention. The subject is discussed at length in the 
sections "Classes of Farm Labor," and "Handling Labor." 

Wages Paid to Farm Help in United States. — The trend of wages in 
the United States is shown in the following table i^^s 



540 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 238. — Wages op Hired Male Farm Labor — United States, 1866-1919 





By the month 


Day labor at 
harvest 


Day labor not 
harvest 




With 


Without 


With 


Without 


With 


Without 




board 


board 


board 


board 


board 


board 


1919 


139.82 


$56.29 


$3.15 


$3.83 


$2.45 


$3.12 


1918 


34.92 


47.07 


2.65 


3.22 


2.07 


2.63 


1917 


28.87 


40.43 


2.08 


2.54 


1.56 


2.02 


1916 


23.25 


32.83 


1.69 


2.07 


1.26 


1.62 


1915 


21.26 


20.15 


1.56 


1.92 


1.13 


1.47 


1914 


21.05 


29.88 


1.55 


1.91 


1.13 


1.45 


1913 


21.38 


30.31 


1.57 


1.94 


1.16 


1.50 


1912 


20.81 


29 . 58 


1.54 


1.87 


1.14 


1.47 


1911 


20.18 


28.77 


1.49 


1.85 


1.09 


1.42 


1910 


19.21 


27.50 


1.45 


1.82 


1.06 


1.38 


1902 


16.40 


22.14 


1.34 


1.53 


0.89 


1.13 


1899 


14.07 


20.23 


1.12 


1.37 


0.77 


1.01 


1898 


13.43 


19.38 


1.05 


1.30 


0.72 


0.96 


1895 


12.02 


17.69 


0.92 


1.14 


0.62 


0.81 


1894 


12.16 


17.74 


0.93 


1.13 


0.63 


0.81 


1893 


13.29 


19.10 


1.03 


1.24 


0.69 


0.89 


1892 


12.54 


18.60 


1.02 


1.30 


0.67 


0.92 


1890 


12.45 


18.33 


1.02 


1.30 


0.68 


0.92 


1888 


12.36 


18.24 


1.02 


1.31 


0.67 


0.92 


1885 


12.34 


17.97 


1.10 


1.40 


0.67 


0.91 


1882 


12.41 


18.94 


1.15 


1.48 


0.67 


0.93 


1879 


10.43 


16.42 


1.00 


1.30 


0.59 


0.81 


1875 


12.72 


19.87 


1.35 


1.70 


0.78 


1.08 


1869 


16.55 


25 . 92 


1.74 


2.20 


1.02 


1.41 


1866 


17.45 


26.87 


1.74 


2.20 


1.08 


1.49 



Sectional Variations in Wage Scales. — The influence of locality upon 
the rate is illustrated in the next table. Different sections possess differ- 
ent wage scales, depending on the type of agriculture and the demand 
for and supply of labor. No special comments are necessary, other than 
to point out the rather striking range between the relatively low schedules 
of the southern states and the relatively high rates of the western states, 
and the fact that the figures tend to prove that farmers, for their own 
protection, are obliged to adjust their wage scales to meet those in force 
in other industries which draw upon the same reservoir of labor. The 
data are from U. S. D. A. Bureau of Statistics studies. 



FARM LABOR 



541 



Table 239. — Monthly Rates for Male Labor, Showing Sectional Variation 
IN Wage Scales, Without Board and to Nearest Dollar'^^ 



Year 


1890 


1910 


1919 


North Atlantic States 


$25 
14 
23 
23 
17 
35 


S33 
18 
32 
35 
22 
46 


$63 


South Atlantic States 


44 


North Central States east of Mississippi River 

North Central States west of Mississippi River 

South Central States 


59 

68 
46 


Far Western States 


87 







Value of Board as a Part of Wages. — The value of the board can be 
calculated from the difference in the monthly rates with and without 
board. Averaged for 1890, 1902, 1910, 1912, and 19191^0 the difference 
amounted to: 

For United States 

Wages without board, per month -. $30 . 76 

Wages with board, per month 21 . 56 

Value of board $9 . 20 

Per cent decrease in cash wages when board is furnished 43 

Wages without board, per day, harvest $2 . 06 

Wages with board, per day, harvest 1 . 68 

Value of board $0 . 38 

Per cent decrease in cash wages when board is furnished 22 



What Constitutes a Satisfactory Wage Scale. — A satisfactory wage 
scale combines (a) the going wage — coupled with recognition that board 
and lodging should be suitable, since, as has already been pointed out, 
these constitute a part of the men's wages, (6) bonus for length of stay, 
(c) additional pay for overtime, {d) additional pay for unusually hard or 
extra hazardous jobs, (e) prompt payment on regular pay days, (f) 
advancement of small sums against wages already earned when needed 
by men for current expenses. 

Paying the Men. — Local regulations and practices govern the method 
of paying men. Some states require (at least in the law), semi-monthly 
payments, or otherwise attempt to safe-guard the men. Some states 
also provide labor commissions empowered to intervene in behalf of 
employees. Such state legislation or provision usually operates entirely 
in favor of the working man, since it is practically impossible to enforce 
contracts with laboring men having nothing to lose if sued and who can- 
not be jailed. 



542 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Prompt Payment of Wage Should Rule. — In general, prompt payment 
of wages when due is important. If it is the poKcy to withhold 
part of the wages, both parties should definitely understand the arrange- 
ment in advance (and preferably draw up the stipulations in writing). 
Some operators practice holding out time on their men, in an attempt to 
insure greater regularity in attendance; this, however, involve serious 
danger of causing discontent and distrust, which in the long run will 
react upon the employer by causing him increasing difficulty in obtaining 
and holding good men. 

Use of Bonuses or Premiums. — The use of the bonus or premium plan, 
by which good men are offered special inducements to stay with an em- 
ployer, is a movement gaining in strength. The method of subsidizing 
takes different forms. It may be an increase in rates for length of service, 
providing family living quarters, allotting a cow or garden patch, per- 
mitting the raising of chickens, furnishing a horse, arranging for weekly 
or bi-weekly trips to town, supplying of phonograph or magazines, 
better living quarters, etc. Attempts thus far are too new and too scat- 
tered to allow the drawing of deductions, but the results are apparently 
well worth while and justify attention to this method of getting and 
holding good men. 

Handling Labor 

Success in handling men depends in no small degree upon one's knowl- 
edge of the characteristics — racial and individual — of the men employed. 
There are, for instance, certain characteristics pecuHar to the middle-aged, 
transient, itinerant, floating "hobo," "blanket-stiff," "bindle-stiff," or 
"bum" as he is variously called. His standard of living is radically 
less exacting than that of the clean-cut American youth who is looking to 
farm work as a means of business advancement. Foreign nationalities 
have their own particular racial traits — as for example the volatile temper 
and impulsiveness of the Latin, the stoicism and steadiness of the Pole, 
the studiousness and cleanliness of the Japanese, the mysticism and 
reticence of the Hindu. Successfully to handle any group necessitates 
a comprehension of their desires, ideals, and aims, so that proper provision 
can be made, especially for their housing, boarding, and supervision. 
When foreigners are employed, a knowledge of their language is very 
desirable, especially in dealing directly with such men as Italians, Greeks, 
or Mexicans. 

Farmer's Part in Getting Good Farm Labor. — If a good class of farm 
labor is wanted, it can be obtained whenever farmers are ready and finan- 
cially able to go to some little effort to encourage good workers to stay 
on the farms and to provide for their proper accommodation. While it 
is not profitable to go to extremes in furnishing facilities for common labor, 



FARM LABOR 543 

yet, when a good, likely young fellow comes along, he should be given 
decent quarters and food, and some effort should be made to teach him 
such farm operations as may be unfamiliar to him. Given steady em- 
ployment, proper care, some recreation, and an outlook for reasonable 
advancement, agriculture can compete successfully in any labor 
market. This means, as a corollary, that farm prices must be suffi- 
cient to warrant these additional costs, production must be diminished, 
or the contributing workers must accept a lower plane of living and 
advancement. 

Selection of Good Foremen Essential. — The bigger the business, the 
more men an employer will fail to reach personally, until finally a point 
is reached where foremen are needed to come in direct touch with the 
men. When an organization reaches such a state, extreme care must be 
exercised in selecting these foremen. Whether one will choose older 
men of wide actual experience, or young, virile fellows who may be 
stronger in theory than in actual practice, depends largely on the proposi- 
tion one has to handle. Personally, from a pretty strenuous experience, the 
author has come to the conclusion that the younger men are to be the 
preferred. The older men have had their opportunities and their pace is 
set: only the exceptional man can rise higher. Older minds are not 
pliant. They tend to resent new methods and new ideas. Yet a real 
knowledge of how to do things is a mighty valuable asset, especially in 
aiding a new man who is taking hold of an old project. On the whole 
the younger men pay greater attention to detail, are anxious to make a 
showing, have the grit, the enthusiasm, the courage, the vitality. They 
make more mistakes than the older men, but if fitted by general experi- 
ence and knowledge for their work, they will show greater advancement 
at the year's end than the majority of the older men. 

Personal Qualities Necessary to the Successful Handling of Men. — 
There is no one quality that insures success in handling men; and, unfor- 
tunately, the lacking one is not always an achievable quality. The chief 
trait counting for success seems to be personal magnetism, a trait hard 
to define and harder to acquire. A forceful personality is another factor, 
ranking, in fact, close to magnetism. This is not intended to conjure 
up the blustering, swearing, bully type of overseer, exercising his author- 
ity largely through a display of physical strength, but rather the quiet 
man who inspires his associates through his innate power to do things, 
and who, by the very energy he radiates, brings others to higher standards 
of efficiency. 

All this implies that a man to handle men, whether as strawboss, 
foreman, superintendent, or general manager, must gain the respect of 
his men. This will come most quickly when his men realize that he is 
fair, and at all times ready and anxious to give them a square deal. 



544 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Personal Relation of Employer to Men. — It is not wise to chum with 
the men to such an extent that they become f amihar. They should be kept 
firmly, although not coldly, at respectful distance. Too much talk over 
trivial matters, too much idle conversation, should be studiously avoided, 
one's remarks being confined to the matter in hand. The time of day 
can be passed pleasantly whenever it is logical to do so, inquiry made as 
to a man's health if he is apparently ill or is recovering from a wound or 
an ailment, and attention given to the man seeking advice. Advice 
is to be given if in a position to do so, otherwise a frank statement should 
be made of one's inability to help. Orders should be given clearly and 
concisely, gauging the language to fit the comprehension of the men, and 
care especially taken to avoid talking over their heads. An employer 
must never joke at or with the men. American humor isn't under- 
standable except by Americans. Usually it provokes even Americans. 

Discouraging Tattling. — When one man starts to talk about another 
the cause lies in a desire on the part of the man so doing either to ingrati- 
ate himself with his listener or to promote some scheme of private revenge. 
In case one listens, he sells himself cheap if the first is the object sought; 
if the second, there may be sufficient plausibility in the tale to cause 
one momentarily to forget the rule of fairness. Should one thus make his 
estimates of his men, he is no judge of human nature and certainly he 
is not taking the proper course to become one. 

Swearing at the Men. — Do not swear at the men, no matter how great 
the provocation. They may stand for it, but it won't strengthen their 
loyalty. 

Information Concerning Risks. — Do not ask any man to undertake a 
risk or expose himself to danger unless he understands what he is doing. 

Employer's Shortcomings to be Avoided. — Avoid hasty temper. 

Avoid sensitiveness — a common characteristic of highly trained men. 
Most laboring men have little patience with a sensitive man; they look 
upon sensitiveness as a sign of possible weakness, a lack of vitahty per- 
haps, and a dislike to mix with the rougher sides of life. One soon finds it 
best to forget the finer aesthetic feelings and to pitch into the game of life 
with a vim — for working for a living is one of the most exciting sports a 
man may tackle. And, it may be added, the busier one is with his own 
problems and the fuller the crowds every minute with thought of what 
he himself has to work out, the less time will be spent in contemplating 
one's own dignity or in fussing about the possibility that someone is 
encroaching upon one's authority. 

If wrong in judgment as to commands given, bear the responsibility 
in person. Never try to shift blame to another. And, furthermore, 
protect the men from unnecessary abuse or unfair treatment at the 
hands of others. 



FARM LABOR 545 

Develop Individual Capacity of Worker. — Conscientious effort should 
at all times be made to place a man where he can work to the best advan- 
tage; it is better to make each worker responsible for certain duties than 
to use men indiscriminately for all kinds of work. The ignorant laborer 
should be given a chance to learn the business. Encourage interest on 
the part of the men by giving them, when qualified, a chance to offer 
suggestions or comments upon the carrying on of the work. Provide some 
recreation (depending on type of men), such as saddle horses, or transpor- 
tation to town or to dances. 

Requiring a Day's Work. — Know what a day's work amounts to and 
expect it. 

Eliminate Petty Vice. — Keep down gambling, carousing, laziness; 
discourage disturbers, faultfinders; discharge men who are unfair in their 
dealings. Avoid taking in such men, so far as possible, by questioning 
each applicant concerning his past work and try to size him up; let him 
d stinctly know that you are demanding a better class of men than what 
satisfies the ordinary employer. 

Prevent Conflicting Orders. — Be careful not to have confliction in orders 
if two partners or more than one foreman or superintendent are covering 
the same job. 

Provide Gentle Workstock. — Keep gentle workstock — or pay more for 
handhng half wild, poorly broken stock. ' 

Good Harness. — Keep harness and implements in repair, to encourage 
men to do good work. 

Planning the Work. — Plan the day's work in a way to prevent loss of 
time and doubling up of men on a job. 

Use of Mechanical Equipment. — Substitute mechanical equipment for 
hand labor wherever and whenever possible. 

Supplying Laborers' Cottages. — Study the possibilities of supplying 
homes for steady workers, even to the extent of permitting purchase under 
a long time system of small payments. 

Stealing Men. — Abstain from enticing or stealing away the men from 
a neighbor, no matter how great may be the provocation because of labor 
scarcity or the discovery of extra desirable workers. 

Liability Insurance. — Carry insurance to protect yourself, and your 
men, in case of injury. Where state insurance is in force its attractive- 
ness is worth looking into. Insurance — state or private — protects the 
rights of the injured and tends to relieve the employer of heavy financial 
obligations should a serious accident occur. 

A Normal Day's Work 

The employer should know what constitutes a fair day's work for 
men, crews, workstock, and implements. Ignorance of this is too often 

35 



546 FARM MANAGEMENT 

the cause of injustice to men, of demoralized crews, and — so swift are 
Rumor's wings — of difficulty in securing help of any sort. 

Conditions Affecting a Day's Work. — Tables follow, to indicate the 
usual output for an average working day. Output will vary with the 
working conditions. The quantity and quality of work accomplished 
will differ with soil; amount, speed, and stamina of rnotive power; size and 
shape of fields; period of daylight; size of crew; experience of operator. 
Variations may be as high as 50 per cent for extreme conditions — good 
or bad. 

Working heavy ground with light horses means less area covered than 
in working sandy soil with big stock. Rate of work of crews in putting 
up hay, harvesting grain, or loading cars will vary with the kinds of 
farm labor used, and the length of the working day. Grain harvest 
crews on the large ranch work especially long days — at times from 5 a.m. 
to 8 p.m. Rates of work of individuals will vary with the heat of the day, 
the heaviness of the job, the individual's personal attitude towards work, 
and the nature and amount of supervision. 

In the picking of fruit, the rate depends on size of trees, size of fruit, 
frequency of moving ladders; on whether the fruit is borne high or low; 
whether trees are open or close pruned; on rapidity of ripening; on 
whether land is level, rolling, or hilly. Rate of pitching and stacking 
hay depends on yields, length of stalk, length of haul, size of stack, size of 
crew. In hoeing, heavy weed growth will slow down progress and reduce 
the area covered. Very hot days are not conducive to a big day's work. 
Lack of supervision with some workers tends to lessen maximum en- 
deavor. Crop yields have a very important effect in setting rates of work, 
low yields naturally slowing down output, high yields increasing rate of 
work. 

An inexperienced worker can accomplish only approxima-tely 50 per 
cent of the work of experienced hands. 

For purposes of study and comparison the tabulated data following 
are of prime value to a farm manager. In general the averages are 
derived from poor to best conditions, and so represent what may reason- 
ably be expected for under mean conditions. 

The average horse walks 1}^ miles on loose ground per hour, 1% 
miles on hard ground doing heavy work, 2 miles doing light work, and 
2}^ miles on road. 



FARM LABOR 
Part I 



547 



Table 240. — Daily Duty of Farm Implements and Machines with Sizes of 
Crew and Required Numbers of Horses 



Kind of machine 



Bean cutter' 

Broadcasting barley 

Binding small grain 

Binding small grain 

Binding small grain 

Binding corn 

Cultivating crops: 

Covering 24 in. of space 

Covering 30 in. of space 

Covering 42 in. of space 

Covering 48 in. of space 

Covering 66 in. of space 

Covering 84 in. of space 

Cultivating land in preparing for 

crops 

Cultivating land in preparing for 

crops 

Drilling alfalfa 

Drilling small grain, 6-8 ft . . 

Drilling small grain, 8-10 ft 

Drilling small grain, 10-12 ft 

Harrow, disc (not lapped) 

Harrow, disc (not lapped) 

Harrow, disc (not lapped) 

Harrow, spike (not lapped) 

Harrow, spike (not lapped) 

Harrow, spike (not lapped) 

Harrow, spike (not lapped) 

Harrow, spring tooth (not lapped) . . . 
Harrow, spring tooth (not lapped ) . . . 

Heading small grain 

Heading" small grain 

Lister 

Manure (machine) spreader 

Marking for planting 

Mowing 

Planking or dragging or floating land. . 
Planking or dragging or floating land. . 

Planting beets 

Planting corn 

Planting corn 

Planting cotton 

Planting beans 

Planting potatoes 

Planting potatoes 

Plowing, walking plow 

Plowing, walking plow 

Plowing, sulky 

Plowing, gang 

Plowing, gang 

Plowing, gang 

Plowing, gang 

Plowing, gang 



Usual size 



Number 

men 
required 



Number 

horses 

required 



2-row 

6 ft. 

7 ft. 

8 ft. 
1-row 



5 ft. 

6 ft. 
8 ft. 

12 tube 
16 tube 
20 tube 

4 ft. 
6 ft. 
8 ft. 
8 ft. 

16 ft. 
24 ft. 
32 ft. 

6 ft. 

8 ft. 
10 ft. 
12 ft. 

75 bu. 
12 ft. 

5 ft. 

6 ft. 
12 ft. 

4-22 in. -rows 

1-42 in.-rows 

2-42 in.-rows 

2-36 in.-rows 

4-28 in.-rows 

1-36 in.-rows 

2-36 in.-rows 

12 in. 

14 in. 

14 in. 

2-14 in .-bottoms 

2-12 in. -bottoms 

3-12 in. -bottoms 

2-8 in. -bottoms 

3-8 in. -bottoms 



1 
1-2 



2 

2 
3-4 
3-4 
4-5 

3 

1 
1 

2 
2 
2 
2 



6-8 

2 

2 

3 
4-6 

4 

6 

8 
2-3 

4 

6 

8 

3 

4 

6 

6 

3 

2 

2 

2 

2 

4 

2 

1 

2 
2-4 
2-4 

2 

3 

2 

3 
3-4 
4-6 
3-6 
5-8 
2-3 
3-4 



Acreage covered 
in 10-hr. day 



10 
60 
10 
14 
18 
7 

4 
5 

73-^ 
10 
12 



10 
14 
10 
15 
20 

5 

9 
14 
10 
30 
40 
60 

9 
12 
20 
24 

5 
12 
25 
10 
10 
20 
12 



loads 



18 



548 



FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 240. — Continued 



Kind of machine 



l^sual size 



Number 

men 
required 



Number 

horses 
required 



Acreage covered 
in 10-hr. day 



Plowing, gang 

Plowing, gang 

Plowing, engine gang ; . 

Plowing, engine gang 

Plowing, engine gang 

Plowing, deep tillage 

Potato digger 

Potato digger (elevator) 

Rake (self dump) 

Rake (side delivery) 

Ring rolling 

Ring rolling 

Roller (land) 

Shredder and husker, corn. . . 
Shredder and husker, corn. . . 
Shredder and husker, corn. . . 

Spreading lime (drill) 

Spreading fertilizer (drill). . . . 

Tedder 

Weed cutting 

Fresno scrape; checking land 



4-8 in.-bottoms 
5-8 in.-bottoms 
4-14 in.-bottoms 
4-14 in.-bottoms 
8-14 in.-bottoms 
2-20 in. -disks 

1-row 

1-row 
12 ft. 

6 ft. 

6 ft. 

8 ft. 
12 ft.-roll 

4 ft.-roll 
6 ft.-roll 
8 ft.-roll 

10 ft. 
10 in. 
6 ft. 
6 ft. 

5 ft. 



1 
1 
2 
2 
2 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
2-3 



4 

6-10 

14-18(a) 

20-25(a) 

25-30(o) 



4 

2 

2 

6 

8 

2 

10-12 

15-20 

25 

2 

3 

2 

2 

4 



5.6 

8.0 

8 
12 
16 

2.5 

3 

3J-^ 
20 
10 

6 



20 

350 bu. 

600 bu. 

800 bu. 

11 

13 

10 

10 

H 



Kind of machine 


Size 


Number 
of men 

to 
operate 


Horse- 
power 
required 


Number 

revolutions 

per min. 


Capacity 

per 10-hr. 

day 




42 in. -fly wheel 
36 in. -fly wheel 
30 in. -fly wheel 

12 in. 
20 by 32 in. 
18 by 36 in. 
36 by 58 in. 
18 by 36 in. 
28 by 50 in. 
36 by 58 in. 


1(6) 

1 

1 

6 

9 
12(c) 
15(d) 
15(c) 
16(rf) 
18(d) 


15-20 
12-15 

8-12 

2-4 
6-8 
15-18 
50-60 
15-18 
30-40 
50-60 




120 tons 






100 tons 






70 tons 


Threshing: 

Separator (pea and bean). . . . 
Separator (pea and bean). . . . 


300-350 

300-350 

1,050-1,150 

1,050-1,150 

1,050-1,150 

750-800 

750-800 


5,500 lb. 
22,000 lb. 
36 000 lb 




96 000 lb 


Separator (oats and barley). 
Separator (oats and barley). 
Separator (oats and barley). 


2,200 bu. 
2,750 bu. 
3,500bu. 



(a) Tractor equivalent. 
(6) Hauling in addition. 

(c) Six horses for forks, bucking straw, and roustabouting. 

(d) Eight horses for forks, bucking straw, and roustabouting. 

Part II 
Table 241. — Rules for Determining Work of Implements 
The usual daily duty per foot of width is: 
2 . acres for plows 
1 . 7 acres for spike tooth harrows 

1 . 5 acres for spring tooth harrows 

1 . 4 acres for disc harrows 

1 . 6 acres for drills 

1 . 6 acres for mowers 

1 . 5 acres for rakes 

2 . acres for grain binders 



FARM LABOR 



549 



Table 242. 



Part III 
-Work Capacity of Stock 



The usual width of implement per horse is: 
.46 ft. of plows 
3.9 ft. of spike tooth harrows 
2.4 ft. of spring tooth harrows 
2.4 ft. of disc harrows 

2.4 ft. of drills 

2.5 ft. of mowers 
6.0 ft. of rakes 

2.0 ft. of grain binders 

Part IV 
Table 243. — Day's Work of Man or Crew, Selected Operations 

Field Crops 
Alfalfa: 

Cocking 1 Man 10 tons 

Capping 1 Man, 1 Horse 20 acres 

Stacking 

Hauling to stack, 10-12 loads per wagon 
Hand pitching and hand unloading into barn 

Size op Crew Average per Day 

3 men, 2 horses 5 tons 

4^5 men, 4 horses 8 tons 

Hand pitching and hand unloading at stack 

2 men, 2-4 horses 8 tons 

4 men, 4-6 horses 15 tons 

6 men, 6 horses 20 tons 

Hand pitching and unloading with hor.se fork at stack or barn 

2 men, 2-4 horses 10 tons 

4 men, 4-6 horses 20 tons 

6-8 men, 6-8 horses 30 tons 

19 men, 15 horses 60 tons 

Size op Crew Average per Day 

Buckraking and stacking with horse fork 

2 men, 2-4 horses 15 tons 

4 men, 4-6 horses 25 tons 

6 men, 6-8 horses 30 tons 

Rate of stacking varies with kind of hay, rate of yield, dis- 
tance of haul, etc. 
Baling 





Tons per 


10-hr. day 


Size of crew 


Range 


Average 


From stack 
7-9 men, 10-14 horses* 


20-45 tons 

15-30 
30-50 


30 tons 


From field 
6—8 men, 6—10 horses 


22 tons 


10-11 men, 12—14 horses 


40 tons 







Engine equivalent, if power press. 



550 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Beans. 

Average 

Hoeing and j^lanting misses J^ acre 

Weeding after planting 5 acres 

Shocking (piling) in field for curing 3 acres 

Picking green beans 1 , 500 lb. 

Corn: 

Marking land 

2-row marker — 1 man, 2 horses lOj'^ acres 

Planting by hand, per man 4 acres 

Hoeing, per man 1 acre 

Suckering, per man 2 acres 

Platform harvester 2 men, 1 horse 5 acres 

Cutting and shocking per man 1^ acres 

Setting up corn after binder, per man 3 acres 

Hauling grain, 1 man, 2 horses 2.2 acres 

Hauling grain, 2 men, 2 horses . . 2 acres 

Hauling stalks, 2 men, 2 horses 5 acres 

Husking, per man 36 bu. 

Filling silo 

Cutting by hand and loading, per man 12 tons 

HauUng to cutter, 1 man, 2 horses 15 tons 

Feeding cutter, 1 man : 60 tons 

Storing in silo, 2 men 60 tons 

By crew: Cutting corn and fiUing silos 
Size of crew 

1 man, 3 horses, cutting 

2 men loading 

3 men, 6 horses hauling 

1 man feed and run engine 
1 man tramping 



Total 8 men, 9 horses 

Size of load, average 1 ton 

Tonnage per day, 44 tons 

Size of engine, 12 hp. 

Length of cutter, 16 in. 
Cotton: 

Listing, 1 man, 3 horses 5 acres 

Cultivating toward plants ("wrap") 1 man, 3 horses 12 acres 

Chopping 2 acres 

Hoeing 2 acres 

Weeding 5 acres 

Picking 

Short staple 200 lb. 

Long staple 125 lb. 

Ginning, 5 men 40 bales of 500 

lb. 



Flax: 



Harvesting, 1 man, 4 horses. 



Average 
15 acres 



FARM LABOR 



551 



Grain: 

Shocking, after binder, per man 

Stacking wheat, 2 men, 2-4 horses 

Turning bound grain, per man 

CradHng wheat, per man 

Bucking sacked grain behind harvester and piling in field 

Barley 

Wheat 

Stacking grain hay (see alfalfa). 

Heading, 12 ft., 5-6 men, 10-14 horses 

14 ft., 6-8 men, 12-14 horses 

Stationary Thrashers (from Stack) t 



6 


acres 


8 


acres 


10 


acres 


2 


acres 


600 sacks 


500 sacks 


24 


acres 


28 


acres 



Crop 



Size of crew* 



Men 



Horses 



Range, 
tons 



Average, 
tons 



Wheat. 



Barley or oats. 



Non-saccharine sorghums. 
Beans or peas 



7-10 
11-13 
14-18 

7-10 
11-13 
14-18 

7-9 

6 
10 
19 



2-4 
2-6 

4-8 

2-4 
2-6 

4-8 

2-6 

2 

6 

12 



12-20 
20-30 
25-45 

15-25 
25-35 
30-55 

20-45 

2-3 

5-10 

15-25 



18 
27 
32 

20 
30 
35 

30 



2M 

7M 



20 



Engine, in addition, to run separator. 

* Size of separator varies through many sizes from 18 by 34 in. to 30 by 50 in. Size 
of crew is only a rough guide to size of machine. 

t Thrashing from field requires 20 per cent more men and enough more horses to 
supply wagons for hauling. 

Harvesting with combine: 





Usual siz€ 


i of crew* 


Range in 




Cut 






Average t 


Average, acre- 










Men 


Horses 


acres 


age 


7 foot 


2-3 


8 


8-15 


10 


9 


2-3 


10-20 


10-20 


12 


12 


4 


22 


15-25 


18 


14 


5 


24 


20-30 


22 


16 


5 


28 


20-35 


25 


20 


5-6 


32 


30-50 


35 


24 


5-6 


36 


30-60 


40 



*Horses often replaced by tractor. Auxiliary engine sometimes used on separator. 
Average crew consists of engineer, header tender, separator tender, sack tender, 
sack sewer. 

fRate depends on yield of grain and amount of lodging. 



552 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Hops: 

Average 

Picking per man 250 lb. 

Potatoes: 

Cutting seed by hand, per man 15 bu. 

Cutting seed by machine, per man 28 bu. 

Planting, plowed in, 3 men, 2 horses 2,^ acres 

Spraying (4 rows at once) 1 man, 2 horses 15 acres 

Picking up and bagging after ordinary plow 
After ordinary plow 

75 bu. crop 60 bu. 

125 bu. crop 75 bu. 

200 bu. crop 100 bu. 

After elevator digger 

75 bu. crop 80 bu. 

125 bu. crop 100 bu. 

Digging and picking up by hand 

75 bu. crop 30 bu. 

150 bu. crop 40 bu. 

Sorting and bagging in shed, per man 100 bu. 

Sorghums (non-saccharine): 

Cutting heads by hand, per man % acres 

Hauling heads to stack, 1 man, 2 horses 5 acres 

Stock Beets: 

Weeding and thinning, per man }i acre 

Hoeing, per man J^ acre 

Pulling and loading, per man 34 acre 

Sugar Beets: 
For seed 

Planting steckling, 3 by 3 ft., per man }4 acre 

For roots 

Thinning, per man ^i acre 

Hoeing, per man 1 acre 

Pulling, topping and loading (12-15 tons yield), per man. 6 tons 

Plowing out, 1 man 23^ acres 

Sweet Peas (for seed): 

Planting 2-28 in. rows, 1 man, 2 horses 6 acres 

Cultivating — Single row, 1 man, 2 horses 3 acres 

Cultivating — Two rows, 1 man, 2 horses 6 acres 

Rogueing, per man M acres 

Hand piling, per man 1 acre 

Carrying to drying sheds, per man 1 acre 

Turning, per man 2 acres 

Threshing (engine), 1 man, 2 horses 23^ acres 

Threshing (horse power), 7 men, 4 horses 5 acres 

First cleaning, per man 13^ acres 

Selected Operations in Producing Fruit 

Orchard Cultivation: 

Average 

Plowing, 12 in. plow 1.5 acres 

Disking 5 ft. disk 5.5 acres 

Harrow, 6 ft. spring tooth 6.0 acres 

Harrow, 7 ft. spike tooth 8.5 acres 



FARM LABOR . 553 

Cultivator, 6 ft. 7 acres 

Furrowing for irrigation 10 acres 

Floating or planking, 10-14 ft 8 acres 

Spreading manure 10 loads 

Orchard Spraying: 

(a) 50-gal. barrel hand pump — 5 gal. per tree, }yi mile 

haul, 2 men, 2 horses 125 trees per day 

(6) 150 gal. Duplex Power Pump — 5 gal. per tree, }i 

mile haul, 2 men, 2 horses 200 trees per day 

(c) Double Acting Horizontal Power Pump 5 gal. a 

tree, }i mile haul 2 men 2 horses 200 trees per day 

(d) 200 gal. Horizontal Power Pump — 5% gal. per 

tree, ^ mile haul, 3 men, 2 horses 300 trees per day 

On an average when trees are in leaf 3 men and 2 
horse crew will spray: 
300 trees per day if 12 ft. or less in height 
175 trees per day if 12 ft.-20 ft. 
125 trees per day if over 20 ft. 
Using from 4 to 6 gal. per tree and two leads of hose. 

Apples: 

Average 

Picking per man, 3000 lb. 

Pruning per man 20 trees 

Removing brush, 1 man, 2 horses 1 acre 

Thinning, per man 20 trees 

Propping, per man 200 trees 

Sorting and packing per man 75 boxes 

Naihng boxes, per man 300 boxes 

Nailing and waiting, per man 175 boxes 

Apricots: 

Setting trees, heavy soil, per man 100 trees 

Setting trees, Hght soil, per man 150 trees 

Picking, per man 30 boxes of 40 lb. 

Pruning, large trees, per man 25 trees 

Pruning, small trees, per man 40 trees 

Berries: 

Picking blackberries, per man 25 trays of 6 baskets each 

(Total 5 lb. per tray) 

Picking loganberries, per man 20 trays as above 

Hoeing berries, per man % acre 

Pruning and thinning wood, per man }i acre 

Cherries: Average 

Picking 150 acres 

Packing in 10 lb. boxes facing one side (per girl) . 10 boxes 

Currants: 

Planting per man M acre per day 

Sulfuring, 1 man 2 acres per day 

Hoeing, 1 man M acre per day 

Pruning, 1 man K-1 acre per day 

Picking, 1 man 10 boxes of 10 lb. each 

Grapes:' 

Setting rooted grape vines, per man 200 

Setting cuttings, per men 1 , 000 



554 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Sulfuring, per man 12 acres 

Tying young vines, per man 1 , 000 vines 

Picking for shipment, per man 2 , 000 lb. 

Olives: 

Picking (for pickling), per man 200 lb. 

Picking (for oil), per man 400 

Pears: 

Picking for cannery, per man 1 ton 

Picking for drying, per man 13^ tons 

Pruning .3 year old trees, heavj^ with brush, 12-20 

cuts per tree, per man 425 

Pruning 4 year old trees, heavy with brush, 12-20 

cuts per tree, per man 215 

Pruning trees, 12-14 ft. high, per man 15 

HauUng brush, 1 man, 2 horses 2 acres 

Spraying, 3 men, 2 horses 250 trees 

Cutting for drying (50 lb. lugs), per man 40 

Packing pears (45 lb. boxes), per man 60 

Prunes: 

Picking up, per man 1,000 lb. of green fruit 

Hauling brush, 1 man, 2 horses 2 acres 

Spraying, 3 men, 2 horses 150 trees 

Pruning, per man 20 acres 

Peaches: 

Pruning, per man 20 trees 

Hauhng brush, 1 man, 2 horses 1^ acres 

Picking,, per man 600 lb. 

Strawberries: 

LeveHng, 1 man, 4 horses 1 acre 

Ridging for planting, 1 man, 1 horse 4 acre 

Smoothing beds, per man H5 acre 

Planting, per man ^0 acre 

Hoeing and weeding, per man J^o acre 

Hand cultivating, per man M acre 

Irrigation, per man Ko acre 

Bedding in nmners, per man Mo acre 

Cutting off stops, per man Hs acre 

Picking, per man 2 chests 

Walnuts: 

Picking up, per man 200 lb. 

Selected Operations in Producing Vegetables 

Asparagus: 

Average 
Cutting, 

White grass, per man 400 lb. 

Green grass, per man 600 lb. 

Cabbage: 

Per DAT 

Setting out by machine, 1 man, 2 horses 4 acres 

Setting out by hand, per man % acre 

Cutting, sorting, 2 men, 2 horses 5 tons 

Trimming and packing, 4 men, 2-4 horses 10 tons 



FARM LABOR 555 

Cantaloupes: 

Marking 7 by 7 feet, 1 man, 2 horses 30 acres 

Ridging for planting, 1 man 2 horses 1 acre 

Planting, 1 man, 2 horses 10 acres 

Vining up, per man 2 acres 

Picking, per man 1 ton 

Carrying out, per man 6 tons 

Sorting, per man 12 tons 

Packing, per man 225 crates of 70 lb. each 

Onions: 

Planting seed, per man 1 acre 

Cultivating, hand cultivator per man. . . % acre 

Pulling per man ^ acre 

Cutting tops, per man 1 acre 

Sacking, 2 men, 1 acre 

Planting out onion sets in field per man 3*^0 acre 

Peas: 

Planting (2 row), 1 man, 2 horses 6 acres 

Cultivating, 1 man, 2 horses 7 acres 

Hoeing, per man ^4 acres 

Green 

Picking, per man 250 lb. 

Cannery 

Turning, (2 men) 3K acres 

Loading, 1 man 6 tons 

Picking up waste peas, 1 man, 2 horses 6 acres 

Rhubarb: 

Marking (2}'^ by 5 ft.), 1 man, 2 horses 15 acres 

Furrowing for planting, 1 man, 2 horses 5 acres 

Plowing for planting, 1 man, 2 horses 4 acres 

Dividing for planting, per man, enough for 1 acre 

Planting, per man 54 acre 

Hoeing, per man H acre 

Picking, washing, and packing 12 boxes 

String Beans: 

Picking, per man 400 lb. 

Sweet Potatoes: 

Setting in field, 1 man, 2 horses 10,000 sets 

Digging by hand, per man 3,000 lb. 

Digging by machine, 1 man, 2 horses 7,000 lb 

Tomatoes: 

Marking, 1 man, 2 horses 15 acres 

Planting per man 2 , 500 plants 

Picking, per man • 1 ton 

Selected Operations in Caring for Stock 
Dairying 

Milking only — With machine. 

Stripping by hand 60 cows 

Milking only — By hand 26 cows 

Milking only — By hand per hour 8 cows 



556 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Milking, feeding, cleaning, and total care, per man 12 cows 

Time required per cow for milking 

By hand 7 min. 

By machine 4-5 min. 

Poultry — (2,000 laying fowl plant, with 2,000 chicks to be raised annually) : 



73^ hr. with chicks 
4 hr. without chicks 
2 hr. 
4 hr. 
Khr. 



Feeding 

Feeding 

Collecting eggs 

Cleaning houses 

Raising green feed 

Sheep: 

Herding, on range 1 or 2 men 2 , 000 herd 

Dry feeding, 1 man, 2 horses 300-400 herd 

With self feeders, 1 man, 2 horses 1 ,000-2,000 herd 

Shearing 

Once a year 33 per day by hand 

Twice a year 75 per day by hand 

Twice a year 88 per day with clippers 



Selected Miscellaneous Operations 

Building Construction: 

Range Average 

Shinghng 2,000-3,000 shingles (8-12 bldls.) 2,500 

Fencing: 

Rods of fence that two men can build in a day, both when setting the posts and 
when driving them, and when they are spaced at various distances. 





Day's work 


Kind of fence 


Distance of posts 




12 ft. 


16 ft. 


24 ft. 


Barbed wire 
3 Strands 

Posts driven 


64.0 
43.7 

76.6 
39.3 

29.5 
19.4 

48.7 
26.3 

61.3 
30.6 


89.1 

58.7 

83.2 
47.9 

56.7 
26.4 

53.0 
33.0 

65.4 
39.0 


116.4 


Posts set 


68.3 


4 Strands 

Posts driven 


92.4 


Posts set 


50.6 


6 Strands 

Posts driven 


67.5 


Posts set 


32.0 


Narrow woven wire with 2 or more barbed wires: 

Posts driven 


74.1 


Posts set 


37.9 


Wide woven wire without barbed wire: 

Posts driven 


80.2 


Posts set 


45.8 







FARM LABOR 



557 



The fence that can be constructed in a day naturally varies with soil conditions, 
the depth to which posts are set or driven, the abiUty of the men doing the work, the 
topography of the ground, and, chstance apart of corner, end, and gate posts. 
Posts are set at an average depth of 32 inches, the corner and end posts are placed 
approximately 40 rods apart. With long, straight stretches of fencing and with other 
conditions favorable, two men could build more fence than the figures in the table 
indicate. 



Hauling: 

Various commodities 
Distance 

1 mile 1 man, 2 horses 

. 2 mile 1 man, 2 horses 

3 mile 1 man, 2 horses 

5 mile 1 man, 2 horses 

Potatoes from field 
Size of load 

40 bu 1 man, 2 horses 

60 bu 1 man, 2 horses 

70 bu 1 man, 2 horses 

Baled hay 

Irrigating: 

Per man z-^-lO acres 



9 loads in 2 days 
7 loads in 2 days 
5 loads in 2 days 
2 loads in 1 day 



225 bu. per day 
350 bu. per day 
450 bu. per day 
^i tons per horse 



No average as rate depends on 
method of applying (i.e., by sUp 
joint pipe or from ditch or by 
subirrigating or by concrete pipe; 
whether furrowed or flooded; 
head of water; lay of land; 
amount of water wanted; extent 
of crop covering ground; and 
porosity of soil. 
Poisoning Gophers: 

1 man per 300-1,000 acres, average 640 (depends on method used, kind of crop 

and prevalence of rodents) 
Sawitig Wood: 

2 cuts per stick l^ cords (4 by 4 by 48 ft.) 

3 cuts per stick 1 cord (4 by 4 by 48 ft.) 

Tiling: 

LiNE.\B Feet 

Digging 3 ft. ditch, per man 100 

Digging 3 1-2 ft. ditch, per man 90 

Digging 4 ft. ditch, per man 80 

Laying 4-6 in. tile, per man 1,800-2,000 

Providing Equipment for Farm Help. — The conviction is spreading 
that American farms are best conducted when labor-saving machinery 
is used wherever possible. Hand labor does not appeal to a nation 
of strongly marked mechanical genius, and the monotony of often re- 
peated routine operations does not commend itself to Americans. 
Specialized farming is pai'ticularly liable to monotony of work, and so is 
often difficult of accomplishment without constant replenishment of 
labor able and willing to put up with the tedious work connected with 



558 FARM MANAGEMENT 

various phases in the production of certain fruits and of sugar beets, 
hops, cotton, fiber, and other field crops. Obviously, one of the immed- 
iate ways of meeting the labor needs is a greater use of imple- 
ments and machinery when practicaable and possible. 

Efficient Use of Equipment. — As a result of the unusual shortage of 
man power in 1917 and 1918, the agricultural press gave a good deal of 
attention to recommendations covering greater use of equipment and 
work stock in place of men. As examples, attention may be called to 
three publications of the U. S. D. A. Office of Farm Management, *^^ 
wherein is presented in a striking pictorial manner, (a) use of better 
methods, management, and implements in haymaking, {h) the increase 
of man power by using bigger teams and more machinery in such opera- 
tions as plowing, harrowing, disking, hauHng manure, planting corn, 
cultivating, harvesting grain, cutting corn, husking corn, and digging 
potatoes, (c) saving labor by harvesting crops with hogs, calves, sheep, 
and cattle. 

Locating Labor Supplies. — The average farm laborer is only fairly 
well posted concerning labor need. When he wants a job he goes to the 
locality where he desires work or where he thinks work is to be had. 
Each locality has some place where laborers congregates, and to this place 
the experienced employer goes. Some laborers are obtained through 
representatives who handle all the business details, such as the so-called 
"labor contractor" of the Japanese and the Hindus, or the more loosely 
connected "mayordomo" of the Mexicans. This contractor is fully 
recognized by both employer and employee — the employer paying him 
a fee for all the men he obtains. An unofficial go-between is often used 
when Portuguese, Greeks, Italians, Swiss, and similar classes, are 
approached. Being gregarious, these men are usually located at some 
boarding house or other meeting place; and here the arrangements 
between employee and employer are perfected either directly or through a 
third party in the person of a boarding house keeper, a merchant, or a 
livery stable keeper. Other classes of labor, such as Americans, English- 
men, and Scandinavians, conduct their negotiations without an inter- 
mediary. Such men when out of em|)loyment can usually be located at 
some central point where they tend to congregate, as at some boarding 
house, or cigar stand, or pool room, or by inquiring at livery stables, or at 
private, state, or federal employment agencies Beginners in agricul- 
ture or newcomers to a section should early learn where the labor haunts 
are, and should promptly get acquainted with influential men who are 
in touch with labor and are possibly able to supply men for all reasonable 
needs. 



CHAPTER XXIII 

FARM TENANCY 

\ The ideal sequence for a beginner in agriculture to follow is through 
successive stages of farm hand, tenant, owner/ In the first stage, he gains 
an actual intimate working knowledge of farming; in the second, he can 
try out his capabilities as a farmer; while in the third he can gain the 
freedom and independence of a land owner. Since the third stage can 
best be planned and most reliably carried out because of experience 
gained in the second stage, it is with this second stage — the tenancy 
period — that we are now concerned. 

Interest in tenancy from the farm management point of view centers 
in the opportunities it gives to young men who are seeking experi- 
ence, and in the means it affords of promoting incomes from farm in- 
vestments. The farm manager is especially concerned with the capital 
requirements of tenants, their labor incomes, the usual methods of leasing, 
and the character of the contract which should govern the relationship 
between tenant and landlord. Capital requirements and labor incomes 
are taken up in the chapters on "Capital" and "Farm Profits." We are 
therefore here confronted with leasing methods and the nature of the 
contract. 

In one of his interesting articles Spillman,^^^ from census figures 
covering the United States, shows that while 76 per cent of farmers under 
25 years of age are tenants, the figure is 55 per cent for the 25 to 34 aged 
group, and with each successive ten year age group, drops to 37 per cent, 
27 per cent, 21 per cent, and 15 per cent. 

Definitions Used in Farm Tenancy. — Tenancy is the leasing or renting 
of farm lands, together with improvements and sometimes equipment, 
by non-owners for the purpose of occupying and operating. 

A tenant is a non-owner who takes possession of farm property, under 
consent of the owner, for the purposes of occupying and farming. If 
operating under a lease, the tenant is called a "lessee;" if under a verbal 
contract, a "renter." 

A lease is a written document setting forth the terms under which a 
given property is conveyed by the owner(s) and accepted by the tenant(s). 
Farm property in some States can be rented for a year's time without a 
written conveyance if the terms are verbally outlined by owner(s) to 
tenaht(s) and accepted by tenant (s) in the presence of a disinterested 
person as witness. 

559 



560 FARM MANAGEMENT 

"The party of the first part" is a term used in a farm lease to designate 
the owner or owners of the property under conveyance; "the party of the 
second part" refers to the tenant or tenants. 

The lessee is one to whom a lease is given : the taker of a lease. The 
lessor is one who leases out land : the giver of a lease. 

The terms "tenant," "renter," and "lessee," in actual practice, are 
used rather loosely and interchangeably, as are the terms "landlord," 
"owner," "lessor." 

A "cropper" is a renter who furnishes little other than labor, and is 
paid with a share of whatever he produces from the land. 

"Cash rent" describes a method of renting or leasing lands for a 
predetermined sum, to be paid in money by the tenant at specified times 
or under definite conditions. 

"Share renting" is the method of sharing gross or net proceeds result- 
ing from the tenant's activities upon the owner's property, in accordance 
with terms settled at the time of making out the lease, payment to be 
made under specified conditions following the production or sale of crops, 
stock, or stock products, or the annulling or completing of the lease. 

"Cash-share rent" means payment partly in cash, with the balance of 
the rent satisfied by sharing all crops or products produced. 

While the three forms of cash, share, and cash-share rent include the 
majority of arrangements for the payment of rent, there are others 
occasionally met. Some of these are touched upon elsewhere in this 
chapter. 

"Tenantry" means a body of tenants or lessees. 

Utilization of Tenancy. — Tenancy of land offers a well defined method 
for relieving non-resident owners of many direct management responsi- 
bilities; it gives an outlet to better use of land for operators who possess 
greater acreage than they can personally handle to advantage; it offers 
a means to start on limited capital, or to gain experience in new or unfa- 
miliar territory, or to test out one's farming inclinations, or to try out a 
farm prior to purchase. In the individual determination of whether or 
not leasing shall be practiced, little attention is paid to the broad national 
question of how increasing tenancy affects the country as a whole. 
Within the very limited knowledge now available concerning land tenancy, 
alarm is often expressed over the steady upward trend in percentage of 
tenancy. Whether this view will prove well-founded when all the facts 
are known and given their relative importance, remains to be seen. This 
is a question for the economist, however, not for the farm manager. The 
farm manager, present or prospective, must take conditions as he finds 
them, and with this as a basis work out the relative benefits of tenancy 
and ownership. The personal element is as big a factor in tenancy as in 
ownership, and from the farm management viewpoint, necessitates a 
careful study of a proposed plan in the light of the mental, physical, and 



FARM TENANCY 561 

financial equipment of the operator, his present training and experience, 
and the ambitions, desires, and wishes of himself and family. 

Testing Proposed Tenancy Plans. — As in testing proposed plans 
from the standpoint of ownership, so, in the case of tenancy, must careful 
inquiry be conducted into the necessary income required, the probable 
expenses which must be met, the capital requirements, the living and 
working conditions, the developed or inherent possibilities of a given 
plan or a given proposition. Too much preliminary study cannot precede 
actual embarkation. 

Tenancy as a Means of Getting Started in Farming. — From the personal 
standpoint, men who start in as tenants usually have very little capital 
and are limited in the size of farm business they can select. After a 
few years of work, they have enough teams and equipment to rent a 
larger farm which will pay them increased returns for their year's labor. 
The changing of tenants from one place to another is thus frequently a 
transitory step made by young men seeking to become farm owners. If 
one, for instance, were compelled to start on a small place and stay there 
for a long term of years, his chances of eventually becoming an owner 
would be much slimmer than if he selected a farm which would use his 
capital in meeting operating expenses. The income that a tenant re- 
ceives through a working capital of $4,000 to S6,000 is decidedly greater, 
naturally, than if he used it in purchasing a farm at the outset. 

Tenancy Provides a Test of the Attractiveness of Farming. — Tenancy 
offers a means of trying out one's liking for farming in general or one's 
preferences for certain lines in particular. Under tenancy, the beginner 
or newcomer is not tied down to any one location. If acreage, soil, 
water, or market proves inadequate, a new start can be made with less 
difficulty since it is not necessary to sell. 

Tenancy Provides a Preliminary Test Prior to Purchasing Farm 
Lands. — As a test for purchase, tenanting for a season is desirable. The 
contract should be made with a provision that purchase is optional at 
the expiration of the season. One cannot perhaps get the most favor- 
able renting terms under this arrangement, but it is better to sustain 
a small loss from the proportion of crops to be utilized as rental rather 
than to buy too hastily and repent at considerable leisure. 

Greater familiarity with a given piece of land may develop unfore- 
seen conditions, such as. noxious weeds, insects, or fungi. The acreage 
may prove too small; water supply inadequate; community uncongenial; 
or climate unhealthful. 

The Principal Kinds of Tenure 1^3 

Farm tenure falls into a few main classes according to the method 
of rent payment, namely, cash, standing rent, share, share-cash, and 
stock share. 

36 



562 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Cash Rent Tenure. — In cash renting, the landlord furnishes only the 
real estate, usually paying taxes and at least the money costs of upkeep. 
The tenant furnishes working capital, bears all operating expenses, and 
receives all the income after paying a fixed amount of cash as rent. The 
landlord does not assume any of the risks of farm operation, and usually 
undertakes no responsibility for management except such supervision as 
may be necessary to. see that the land and improvements are not 
abused. 

Standing Rent Tenure. — Standing rent — sometines called "lint rent" 
— is a modified form of cash rent. The tenant agrees to pay so many 
bushels of grain or so many bales of ginned cotton for the use of the farm. 
The landlord gets the same amount no matter how large or how small the 
crop. Consequently he is freed from the risk of loss due to bad seasons 
or bad management, and therefore from the necessity of assuming 
responsibility for the management of the farm. Unlike true cash rent, 
however, the actual rent received by the landlord in the system of stand- 
ing rent is subject to variation due to changes in the prices of the products 
received as rent. 

Share Rent Tenure. — In share renting, the landlord receives a share 
or fraction of all or of certain crops and sometimes also of live stock 
products and increase of live stock.- More generally than in renting for 
cash or for a standing rent, he also pays some of the expenses of produc- 
tion. There are numerous variations in different parts of the country and 
under different types of farming with regard to the contributions and 
receipts of the respective parties. 

Share-cash Rent Tenure. — A modified form of share renting is 
the share-cash system. This consists of sharing the more important 
crops or stock products, the tenant paying cash rent for pasture and 
occasionally for buildings, use of garden, or other special privileges. 
The system often has an advantage in that the landlord, because of the 
cash rent feature, is more wilKng that the tenant should increase the 
acreage in pasture and consequently engage in live stock farming to a 
greater extent than would be the case if the landlord received only a 
share of the crops and nothing for use of pasture. 

Cropping Rent Tenure. — A form of share renting commonly known as 
"cropping" or the ''cropper system" in cotton and tobacco-producing 
regions, superficially resembles the system of share renting in that the 
cropper pays the landlord a share of the crop. However, the cropper 
usually contributes nothing but human labor to the enterprise, and under 
the laws of a number of States is considered a laborer rather than a 
tenant. The majority of croppers are subject to supervision by the 
landlord and are dependent on him not only for the capital needed for 
putting in the crop, but also for living expenses while the crop is being 
produced. 



FARM TENANCY 563 

Preferences for Either Share or Cash Rent. — For purposes of compar- 
ing cash and share rent, the reasons of preference are indicated below: 

I. Reasons Given for Preferring Share Tenancy 

(A) Landlords' reason: 

1. It tends to be more profitable to the landowner because tenants are usually not 
willing to pay a cash rental which is equal to the full annual value of the land, for 
fear the crop will not be up to the average or for fear prices will fall. 

2. Since the landlord helps in the management, he is better able to keep the land 
in condition and may be able to increase the total product so that both tenant and 
landlord will have larger incomes. 

3. The landlord takes more interest in his farm when he receives a share of the crop. 

4. The landlord shares the extra profits due to extra good crops, and gets some- 
thing out of a poor one, whereas, in case he contracts for a fixed rent, the tenant gets 
all the advantage of an extra large crop, while in case of crop failure the tenant is often 
unable to pay the fixed rent and the landlord has to stand the losses of poor years 
without extra compensation when the crops are good. 

5. Cash tenants do not usually put so much stock on the farm as share tenants 
operating under a land and stock lease where the landlord furnishes a part of the 
stock. Hence the land is not so well kept up. 

(B) Tenants' reasons: 

1. The risk is less than with cash rent, especially where crop failures are not unlikely. 

2. The amount of capital required is less, thus lightening the tenant's investment. 

3. The landlord is more wilHng to make permanent improvements which will 
increase the productiveness of the farm. 

4. The landlord's experience can be turned to good advantage in the case of little 
experience in farming on the tenant's part. 

II . Reasons Given for Preferring Cash Tenancy 

(A) Landlords' reasons: 

1. Cash rent is less bother. 

2. Landowners' mistrust of some tenants. 

3. Landlords' fear of careless, slip-shod farming. 

4. Advantage of prearranged price. 

5. Good tenants with capital to farm right prefer cash rental. 

6. The cash lease is simpler, with less chance for controversy. 

(B) Tenants' reasons: 

1. Independence and freedom from owner's close supervision and inspection. 

2. Desire to feel that the entire surplus product is their own to dispose of as seems 
best. 

3. Cash tenancy is believed to be more profitable to the tenant. 

4. Shifting of payment of taxes, depreciation, and upkeep to the landlord. 

5. Tenant obtains all the benefit of superior tillage and management. 

6. Greater latitude is allowed in cropping and farming the property. 

But there will commonly be one outstanding feature overshadowing all 
others to influence the tenant or the landlord in his final choice of method. 

Length of Tenure. — In most cases leases in America run for only one 
year, but with privilege of renewal upon one or two months notice, al- 



564 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



though some leases provide for continuous operation from year to year 
unless due notice of intent to discontinue is served by either party. 

Short Term Lease Favored. — The one-year lease is ordinarily favored 
by both tenant arid owner because : 

1. Changing conditions of crop yields, market prices, labor situation, necessitates 
revision of contract terms between landlord and tenant. 

2. Sickness may necessitate withdrawing. 

3. Each likes to reserve privilege of changing if he can better himself. 

Period of Tenure. — The lease year occasionally corresponds with the 
calendar year but more commonly coincides with the crop year, i.e., 
March 1 to March 1, November 1 to November 1. 

Influence of Annual Leases on Changing of Tenants. — Contrary to 
natural expectation and popular belief, annual lease contracts may not 
mean more frequent moving of the tenant than do long-term contracts. 
In fact, investigations on Wisconsin and Illinois dairy farms show that 
tenants remain longer on the same farm under an annual renewable lease 
than under lease contracts of two, three, or five years duration. On 
Kansas grain farms, tenants often have remained 15 to 20 years on the 
same farm under an annual lease. Moreover, in some sections tenants 
have operated the same farm 25 to 50 years under annual leases, in the 
meantime buying farms which they in turn have leased to others. 

Spillmani*2 shows that, based on 1910 census figures for the United 
States, type of tenure and length of residence are : 



Cash tenants, 
per cent 



Share tenants, 
per cent 



Less than 1 year 

1 to 3 years 

2 to 5 years 

5 to 10 years 

Over 10 years 

Average years on same farm 




Conditions When Long Term Leases are Favored. — Many tenants 
and some landowners prefer long-term leases, running 5 to 10 years. 
Replies to a questionnaire recently addressed to tenants on Kansas wheat 
farms show that in almost every case the tenant would prefer a contract 
longer than one year. In a survey of 143 tenant dairy farms in Wisconsin 
and Ilhnois, 76 per cent of the leases in Wisconsin and 66 per cent of those 
in Illinois were for 1 year, while 14 per cent of those in Illinois were for 5 
years. 

Under certain special conditions, a long-term lease is required for the 
successful fulfillment of a contract. When live stock is leased, it is cus- 



FARM TENANCY 565 

tomary to make a contract for 5 to 10 years. Contracts with a tenant 
for clearing land commonly give the tenant 5 or 6 years to bring the land 
into condition and receive adequate returns for the labor of clearing. 

This is particularly true when more than a single year is essential 
to the successful fulfillment of the contract, as in building up certain stock 
industries, in clearing land, in establishing perennial crops as alfalfa, in 
raising nursery stock. 

Example of Long Term Leases. — In Kansas, stock share leases run 
for 3 to 5 years. In Missouri, over nine-tenths of the leases are for 1 year. 
Gray and Turner find^*^ that in the case of long leases for cash rent, the 
actual cash rental value of the land may become out of line with the rent 
specified in the lease on account of changes in prices and other conditions. 
Such objection to long-term leases is overcome in part, if not entirely, 
when the rent is a share or a fixed amount of the ci-op. The landlord 
may be prevented from taking advantage of favorable opportunities to 
sell the land unless the lease contains a clause permitting sale. Such a 
clause, however, tends to nullify the long-term character of the lease 
unless accompanied by provisions for compensating the tenant substan- 
tially for termination by sale. Another objection to the long lease is 
that while it is binding on the landlord, it may have but slight restriction 
on the tenant who has little property. 

Advantages of the Long Term Lease. — The long lease enables the ten- 
ant to undertake extensive improvements such as liming or tiling, and 
to engage in systems of rotation covering a considerable period of years, 
without fearing that the fruits of his labor will be lost through the ter- 
mination of the lease. However, this advantage may be obtained under 
the short lease when the lease contains provisions for compensating the 
tenant for unexhausted improvements made by him. 

Advantages of the Short Term Lease. — The short lease has great 
advantages for both parties because of its elasticity. Our country is one 
of rapid changes, and it is doubtful if any considerable number either of 
landlords or of tenants care to be bound by lease contracts of long dura- 
tion. Moreover, short leases do not necessarily imply short tenures; and, 
as has already been remarked, such statistics as are now available appear 
to indicate that in the United States tenants under one-year leases have 
occupied the farms leased for a greater number of years than those whose 
leases were for longer periods. 

Length of Lease Depends upon Circumstances. — Since the amount of 
the landlord's share depends largely on the efficiency of the tenant, the 
former is not likely to want to enter into a contract for a long period until 
he is sure of the tenant's efficiency. Moreover, because of the compara- 
tively intimate relationship that usually exists between landlord and 
tenant in share farming, the success of the enterprise depends to a large 
extent on the personalities of the two parties and on their abilities to work 



566 FARM MANAGEMENT 

together harmoniously. Many of the younger tenants are compelled at 
first to rent inferior farms, and desire to retain them only until they can 
obtain better ones. 

For these reasons it is probably wise to start with a one-year lease, 
but with a clause providing for renewal. 

Whether the lease should be for one year or for a longer period is likely 
to be determined in part by circumstances. Thus, when the landlord 
furnishes all the operating capital, makes all the improvements at his own 
expense, and provides for the maintenance of fertility, there may be little 
reason for a lease running longer than one year. On the other hand, when 
the contract calls for the clearing of land by the tenant in return for the 
free use of it or for use at a nominal rent, a lease of at least 5 or 6 years 
may be necessary. Similarly, when the tenant is expected to plant a 
considerable acreage in fruit or in perennial crops, a term of several 
years may be desirable. In fact, any lease contract which requires 
a considerable investment of irremovable capital on the part of the tenant 
may necessitate either a lease of considerable duration or agreements for 
compensation at termination for unexhausted improvements made by 
the tenant. It should not be assumed, however, that either a long lease 
or provision of compensation for unexhausted improvements will alone 
induce good farming. While the absence of both arrangements may 
tend to discourage an efficient tenant from pursuing sound methods of 
agriculture, other provisions in the lease may be necessary to compel the 
inefficient and improvident tenant to employ such methods. Where 
such is the case, specific requirements concerning the system of farming 
should be accompanied by stipulations permitting careful supervision 
on the part of landlord. 

Leasing Practices in the United States. — A summary of leasing 
practices common to the United States is included in an admirable study 
by Dr. E. V. Wilcox^^^ of the distribution of investments, expenses, and 
income between the landlords and tenants. 

Cash rents vary within wide limits and are rated at so much per 
farm or so much per acre; the demand for farms, the type of land and 
its crop producing power, the location and reputation of the farm, the 
condition of its buildings and other structures, and the amount of personal 
property, all affect the leasing rates. Range land varies from 10^ to 
$2.00 cash rent annually per acre; grain land from $2 to $15 per acre; 
land suitable for field crops of potatoes, sugar beets, corn, cotton, etc., 
ranges from $6 to $40; land in perennial hay crops, alfalfa, clover, blue 
grass ranges from $8 to $40; lands for truck crops from $15 to $60; 
fruit orchards from $25 to $100. 

Under the share system of payment, the same factors affect the 
division as under cash rentals. Fractions range from half-and-half, 
one-third and two-thirds, one-fourth and three-fourths, two-fifths and 



FARM TENANCY 567 

three-fifths, two-sevenths and five-sevenths, etc. Grain and grain hay 
land is usually leased one-third to owner and two-thirds to tenant, or one- 
fourth and three-fourths if tenant furnishes everything but land and 
buildings; two-fifth and three-fifths, or one-half and one-half if owner 
furnishes a part of the work stock and implements or meets a portion of 
the expense for seed and harvesting, or other operating expenses. For such 
crops as sugar beets, potatoes, corn, and beans, the fractions run from one- 
fifth to one-half to owner, remainder to tenant; fruit orchards, one-third 
to one-half to owner and remainder to tenant; dairies, one-fourth to one 
half to owner, remainder to tenant. 

Summing up methods of renting, Wilcox^^^ reports (briefed for our 
purposes) : 

Methods of Sharing Crops and Stock Products^** 

Field Crops. Corn. — On general farms in the corn belt when the tenant furnishes 
working capital and hired labor, the landowner commonly receives one-half of the 
corn as well as of other crops. This is the prevailing custom in Indiana, Illinois, 
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, 
Maryland, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. Con- 
siderable variation in the share of corn, however, is to be noted in these States. 
Sometimes the landlord receives only two-fifths, one-third, or even only one-fourth of 
the corn. On certain New Jersey farms where the landowner pays all expenses, in- 
cluding hired labor, he receives two-thirds of the corn. The same fraction for division 
of the corn is used on Ohio farms where the tenant receives a small guaranteed wage 
in addition to one-third of the corn. Occasionally in Virginia the tenant suppUes 
three-fourths of the fertihzer on corn land and receives three-fourths of the corn. 
Share croppers on cotton farms, who furnish nothing but labor, commonly receive 
one-half of the corn or pay cash rent for corn land, while share renters who furnish 
the working capital and the labor, usually get two-thirds of the corn. In cases on 
Colorado farms where the tenant suppHes tools and horses and pays all expenses, the 
landowner receives one-third of the corn. On general farms in Delaware, the land- 
owner usually gets one-half of all crops, including corn. 

Wheat and Other Grains. — Records of tenant wheat farms in Kansas, Nebraska, 
Minnesota, North Dakota, and Montana show that one-half the total number of 
landowners received one-third; for one-fourth the number share is one-half; while 
the others gets two-fifth of the wheat. On these farms, the tenant supplies working 
capital and hired labor. Occasionally other fractions, such as two-sevenths or five- 
twelfths, are used in dividing the wheat in the wheat States of the upper Mississippi 
valley. Through the corn belt, the tenant usually pays one-half of the wheat and 
other grains on share-rented farms. Very generally where several cereal grains are 
raised on the same farm, all of these grains are divided between landlord and tenant 
by the same fraction, the lease prescribing that the landowner shall receive either one- 
half or one third of all grain. The landowner's share of small cereal grains, as is the 
case with many other crops, is smaller in western States than in the corn belt. Fre- 
quently the landowner receives only one-third of the wheat and other grain, especially 
when the tenant pays thrashing expenses, as compared with one-half of the oats, 
the renter getting two-thirds. In Colorado, the landowner commonly receives one- 
third of the oats and less often one-half, while in the corn belt and various other 
States the landowner usually receives one-half of the oats or more rarely one-third 
or two-fifths. On some New Jersey farms, the landlord may pay all expenses and 
receive two-thirds of the oats and wheat, 'his share otherwise being one-half. 



568 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Hay and Fodder. — Almost universally on share rented farms, when the tenant 
furnishes working capital and hired labor, hay is divided half-and-half if sold at 
all. Otherwise the hay produced on the farm is used in feeding partnership stock, 
but if the landowner owns no stock the tenant may pay cash rent for hay land. 

On dairy farms and stock farms throughout the country, it is frequently pre- 
scribed in the lease contract that hay and forage shall not be sold except with the 
permission of the landlord, but shall be fed to the stock on the farm. On grain farms, 
the tenant often pays a cash rent for hay land and has all the product to sell or to feed 
to his own stock. In general, when the hay is shared half-and-half the tenant is 
required to pay one-half of all expenses and to supply the necessary tools and work 
stock. In a few cases, however, the tenant receives three-fourths of the hay. In 
Alabama and elsewhere in the cotton belt, share croppers on cotton farms commonly 
receive one-half of the corn fodder, sorghum, and other forage produced on the farm. 
In Colorado when the tenant furnishes tools, horses, feed, labor, and thrashing expense, 
he usually receives one-half of the alfalfa, and less often one-third. The bahng expenses 
are usually shared proportionately to the shares of the crop received by tenant and 
landlord. On such farms, the water assessment is commonly paid by the landlord, 
less often by the tenant, but sometimes is shared equally. In Kentucky, with all 
working capital and expense shared equally, the tenant's share of the alfalfa is one- 
half, while he may receive one-third of the timothy or, less often, three-fifths. Wide 
variations occur on Nebraska farms with reference to the fractional sharing of hay, the 
tenant receiving one-half or three-fifths or even two-thirds as his share. 

It is frequently stipulated in the lease that straw shall not be burned or removed 
from the farm. In some cases, however, it is specified that the land owner shall re- 
ceive one-half or three-fourths of the straw. 

Cotton. — Cotton is commonly raised on tenant farms under one or the other of 
two systems known as share cropping and share renting, cash renting being a less 
common method. Under the share cropping system, the cotton crop is divided half- 
and-half. Some variations are noted in the customs prevailing in different States 
in regard to share croppers. In Alabama, the landlord commonly furnishes all 
machinery and work stock and one-half of the fertilizer; less frequently, he furnishes 
all the work stock and fertilizer, while the tenant furnishes all machinery and feed. 
The landlord commonly provides all seed and pays for one-half of the ginning. In 
Georgia, the landlord usually provides all working capital and pays all expenses except 
for ginning and fertilizer, which are shared equally. The same arrangement prevails 
in Louisiana, but the tenant may also get one-half of the corn or pay cash rent for 
corn land, as is frequently the case in other cotton States. In Mississippi, the tenant 
ordinarily supplies all labor and one-half the fertilizer, while the landlord provides 
cabin, garden, tools, mules, feed, seed, and fuel. The tenant may also pay cash 
rent for all land not planted in cotton. Occasionally in North Carolina, the landlord 
furnishes all of the fertilizer, in other instances the landlord furnishes one-half of the 
fertilizer and one-half of the seed, the tenant supplying the remainder. Similar 
arrangements are customary in South Carolina, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Texas. 
Share croppers are essentially laborers under a system which gives them a personal 
interest in securing good yields. 

Under the method of share renting, on the other hand, the tenant commonly 
furnishes mules, feed, tools, seed, and labor, while the landlord supplies land, cabin, 
garden, and fuel. For the most part, the expenses for fertilizer, ginning, and bagging 
are paid by each party in proportion to his share of the crop. The landlord receives 
one-fourth or one-third of the cotton, according to local conditions and fertility of the 
soil. The vmderstood conditions for share renting are practically the same in all the 
cotton States. In Texas, a law has been passed prescribing that the landlord shall 



FARM TENANCY 569 

not receive more than one-third of the grain and one-fourth of the cotton for land 
leased under these conditions. 

Under the cash renting system, the tenant pays all expenses and the rent is paid 
in a specified number of bales of cotton. In Alabama, the tenant pays 1)4. to 2H 
bales of cotton per mule, but in Alabama and other cotton States the rent may be 2 
to 3 bales per mule on more fertile land. Comparatively few tenants on cotton farms 
pay a fixed amovmt of money rent. 

Potatoes. — In New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland, potatoes 
are shared half-and-half where the tenant furnishes work stock, machinery, and hired 
labor. In the wheat States, the landowner more commonly receives one-third of the 
potatoes. In the Greeley potato district of Colorado, the common practice is for the 
landlord to receive one-third of the potatoes. In Delaware, when the landlord fur- 
nibhes tools, machinery, work stock, and one-half of the potato seed, other expenses 
being shared equally, the crop is divided half-and-half. In a few instances in Indiana, 
the landlord accepts as his share one-half of the potatoes in the field before digging, 
or one-third "in the bushel" (dug and measured), at the option of the tenant. Fre- 
quently, however, the potato crop is shared half-and-half "in the bushel." A common 
custom in North Dakota and elsewhere is for the landlord to furnish one-half of the 
seed potatoes, receiving one-half of the crop. 

Sugar Beets. — Tenants who farm land to sugar beets in Colorado invariably sup- 
ply all tools, feed, work stock, and labor, while the landlord pays water assessments 
and land tax. Under this system the landlord receives one-fourth of the sugar beets. 
In a few instances, however, the landowner supplies tools, feed, supplies, horse labor, 
and twine, while the tenant provides all hand labor. The landowner receives 
two-thirds of the sugar beets under this arrangement, and all of the beet tops. 
Occasionally the landowner receives only one-fifth or one-sixth of the sugar beets. 
The prevailing fraction is one-fourth, and the present tendency is toward an even 
larger share. Moreover, in a few instances, the tenant pays one-half of the water 
assessment. In practically all cases, the tenant hauls the crop to market. 

Orchard Fruits. Apples. — The prevaiUng custom in New York, Pennsylvania, 
Maryland, Indiana, Iowa,' Nebraska, Colorado, and elsewhere is for the apple crop . 
to be shared half-and-half between tenant and landlord. On New York farms, when 
the tenant provides only the labor, the landlord receives two-thirds of the apples, 
while, when all expenses, including apple storage and hired labor, are shared equally, 
the crop is divided half-and-half. In Pennsylvania, the landlord frequently pays 
two-thirds of the fertihzer bill for orchard crops on farms where the apples are shared 
half-and-half. 

Peaches, Pears, Plums, and Cherries. — On farms where all expenses are shared 
equally, the crop of peaches, plums, and pears is divided half-and-half. On New 
York farms, where the tenant sometimes supplies nothing but labor, the landlord 
may receive two-fifths of the cherries and two-thirds of the apples and peaches. On 
Indiana farms, when the tenant supplies horses and tools, and when the cost of hired 
labor, marketing, and spraying is shared equally, the landlord receives one-half of the 
peaches. When the tenant furnishes only the labor on New York farms, the landlord 
may receive two-thirds of the peaches, and when the tenant provides two-thirds of 
the barrels and all labor, while the landlord provides all fertihzer, spraying material, 
and horses, the landlord's share is one-third of the peaches and pears. 

Truck Crops. Onions. — In New Jersey, the landowner usually pays the taxes 
and fertilizer bills, while other expenses except labor are shared equally. The tenant 
supplies tools, machinery, and horses. On such farms, the landowner receives one- 
half of the onions, but when the tenant supphes only labor the landowner's share is 
two-thirds. 



570 FARM MANAGEMENT 

In Massachusetts, the tenant usually provides hand tools, hand labor, and seed, 
while the landowner furnishes all horse labor and fertiUzer and pays the taxes. The 
cost of bags is for the most part shared equally, but in some cases is paid by the pur- 
chasers. Under these conditions, the landowner receives one-half the onions. 

In New York, the tenant furnishes one-half the tools, fertiUzer, and seed, and all 
hand labor, while the landowner suppHes all horse labor and crates, and receives one- 
half of the onions. 

Cabbage. — On New York cabbage farms, if the tenant provides the tools, horses, and 
all labor, while other expenses are shared equally, the crop is divided half-and-half. 
In Colorado, the tenant may furnish all tools, feed, suppUes, and horse labor, and 
receive one-half the crop, or the landowner may furnish all tools, feed, supplies and 
horse labor, while the tenant provides all hand labor and 45 per cent of the seed. 
Under the latter condition, the tenant's share of the crop is 45 per cent. 

Tomatoes. — In Delaware, if all expenses are shared equally except labor, which is 
furnished by the tenant, the landlord receives two-fifths of the tomatoes and one-half 
of the grain, but sometimes his share of the tomatoes is only one-fourth. In Mary- 
land, in cases where the tenant supplies tools, horses, and all labor, and where all 
other expenses, including seed, baskets, and crates, are shared equally, the landlord 
receives one-half the tomatoes. The common custom in New Jersey is for the 
landlord and tenant to furnish hampers and spraying material jointly, while the 
landlord pays the taxes and fertilizer bills and receives one-half the tomatoes. Occa- 
sionally, the tenant furnishes only the labor, in which case the landlord's share of the 
tomatoes is two-thirds. 

Cantaloupes. — In Maryland, the tenant supplies the tools, mules, and labor, while 
other expenses are shared equally and the crop is divided half-and-half. 

Peas and Beans. — In Colorado, the landowner receives one-third of the beans as 
his share. Peas raised for canning purposes in Maryland are shared half-and-half 
when the tenant furnishes tools, work horses, and labor, other expenses being shared 
equally. In New York, when the tenant supplies tools and horses, and all expenses 
are shared equally, the landlord receives one-half of the beans. In a few instances 
when dry navy beans are marketed, the landlord receives one-half of the product, 
although he bears only 45 per cent of the expenses. 

Live Stock and Stock Products. Cows. — In Arizona, a system has grown up under 
which cows are rented to farmers. Similar arrangements are noted occasionally 
elsewhere. A creamery owner may furnish cows to farmers for a portion of the cream 
returns each month or for a cash pa>Tnent of 50 ff to $1.50 per month. Under this 
system the owner of the cows also receives one-half of the increase in calves. Occa- 
sionally other owners of cows may rent them to farmers for one-half the increase, the 
calves to be divided when 6 months old and the farmer to have all of the milk. 

Milk and Cream. — On dairy farms in all States where expenses are shared equally, 
the landowner receives either one-half the milk, whether it is sold as market milk or 
to a condenser, butter factory, or cheese factory, or one-half the cream. The landlord 
may furnish one-half the cows and sometimes one-half the tools and work horses. 
In some States, the landlord furnishes all of the cows, but the tenant must bear half 
of the expense of cows purchased to keep up the herd, and must replace cows that die. 
Sometimes, as in New Jersey and Delaware, the tenant furnishes only labor and one- 
third of the feed and fertilizer, receiving one-third of the milk proceeds. 

Beef Cattle. — In several States where the production of beef cattle has become a 
large industry, as in Iowa, for example, the tenant maj' furnish tools and work horses, 
haul the milk, and pay the road taxes, while the landlord pays other real estate taxes 
and furnishes one-half the cows, beef cattle, and hogs. In cases of this sort, the cost of 
feed and seed is shared equally and the proceeds from cattle sold are divided half-and- 
half. 



FARM TENANCY 571 

Colts. — Very commonly when work horses belonging to the tenant are allowed free 
pasture and are fed from undivided feed, the landlord pays stallion service fees and 
receives one-half of the colts. 

Hogs. — On hog farms, as in Iowa and Oklahoma for example, the tenant may sup- 
ply all the labor, tools, and horses, and one-half the hogs, the cost for feed being shared 
equally. Under these conditions, the proceeds from the hogs are divided half-and- 
half. Occasionallj^, a farmer rents sows with pig from a hog owner and cares for them 
until the pigs are weaned. The pigs are then divided equally and the hog owner 
receives a number of sows equal to that originally furnished. If the pigs are fattened, 
the owner of the stock must furnish one-half the feed. 

Sheep. — On Indiana farms when the tenant supplies the tools, horses, and labor, 
and pays all the expenses, and the landlord furnishes all the sheep, the lambs and wool 
are divided in equal shares. At the termination of the lease, usually made for a 
5-year period, the tenant must return to the landlord the number of sheep furnished 
by him at the start. In other instances, the landlord furnishes one-half the sheep 
and receives as his share of the proceeds one-half the wool. In Maryland, on general 
farms rented for one-half share, the tenant may supply the tools and work stock and 
take one-half the proceeds from the sheep. 

Angora Goats. — In a few instances goat breeders have rented goats to farm owners 
for one-half the mohair and kids. In such cases, the farmer bears all expenses. 

Poultry and Eggs. — On most rented farms, the tenant owns all the poultry, being 
allowed to keep 50 to 1,000 hens and occasionally a few ducks, geese, turkeys, and 
guinea fowl. Quite often, however, the tenant is prohibited from keeping any poultry 
except hens. In such cases, the returns from the poultry belong entirely to the tenant, 
but occasionally the landlord may specify for himself the privilege of receiving eggs 
and fowls for table use. Where poultry constitutes a more important enterprise in 
the operation of the farm, the fowls may be owned jointly. In such cases as, for 
instance, in Delaware on one-half share rented farms, the landlord receives half the 
eggs and increase. In a few instances on dairy farms, particularly in Indiana, the 
landowner receives two-thirds the eggs. 

Methods of Sharing Pasture. — In the corn belt, the common practice on high- 
priced land is to require the tenant to pay a cash rent for pasture on crop farms, while 
in regions where land prices are low the tenant may receive the use of the pasture 
free as a perquisite. The cash rent for farm pasture ranges from $1 to $10 per acre, 
being usually $4 to $6 per acre. Such pasture land is commonly in a system of rota- 
tion, and it is considered as potentially crop land. The rent per acre, therefore, is 
fixed at about the same price as would be charged under a cash system for the crop 
area of the farm. 

On general farms in Colorado, rented on shares with expenses shared equally, the 
tenant may receive one-half the proceeds from the use of pasture. These proceeds 
commonly come from fees for pasturing outside horses or other stock. In general, 
when the tenant has the free use of pasture for his work stock and a few cows and hogs, 
he is required to share equally with the landowner the colt and calf proceeds. 

Dairy Farms. — On dairy farms, the landlord may provide one-half of the cows, 
while the tenant furnishes the other half of the cows and all of the horses and ma- 
chinery and receives one-half of the proceeds. In other cases, the landlord may own 
all the cows while the tenant furnishes all other equipment and receives one-half the 
proceeds. In such cases, the tenant bears one-half the loss by death of the cows or 
one-half the cost of cows purchased to keep up the herd. In still other instances, 
the landlord may furnish everything except labor and receive two-thirds of the 
proceeds. In the first two systems, expenses are shared about equally, while in the 
third system expenses are borne in proportion to the shares of the landlord and 



572 FARM MANAGEMENT 

tenant in the proceeds. Occasionally, all equipment, including cows, hogs, poultry, 
work horses, tools, machinery, and other working capital, is shared equally, as well 
as all expenses of whatever nature. In this case, also, the proceeds are shared half- 
and-half. 

Dairy Leasing Practices — Wisconsin and Illinois. — In the old estab- 
lished dairy sections as represented by Green County, Wisconsin, and 
Kane County, Illinois, ^"^^ the most common system of share rent of dairy 
farms is the half-and-half. Under this system, the landlord furnishes 
land, buildings, half the productive stock, part of the seed, and some- 
times part of the fertihzer. All stock on these farms is fed usually 
from the grain and hay owned in common, and if feed of any kind is 
bought its cost is shared equally between landlord and tenant. In general, 
each party pays the taxes on all property owned by him, including the 
farm read tax, though in many cases in the North Central States all 
the farm road tax is worked out by the tenant. 

Under this system, the poultry frequently is owned exclusively, in 
limited numbers, by the tenant, he getting all the proceeds there from, 
but with this exception each party generally receives half the proceeds 
from farm sales of all products of whatever nature. 

If the landlord furnishes all the cows, the tenant bears half of a loss by 
death. The landlord receives receipts for sales and meets all repurchases to 
keep up the herd. Occasionally, the tenant, instead of standing half the 
loss by death of a cow, gives the landlord a fixed amount, from $5 to $15 
per head for each cow dying. 

Less frequently dairy farms are share-rented on the one-third and 
two-third system. Under this system, the landlord supplies everything 
but the man labor, which is furnished by the tenant. The landlord, 
under this system, gets two-thirds of the sales of all products and the 
tenant one-third, and in case feed and concentrates are purchased, the 
tenant pays one-third their cost. 

Stock Farms Leasing Practices. — On stock farms, the tenant com- 
monly supplies tools and horses while the landlord furnishes half of the 
productive stock and receives half the proceeds. The landlord may 
provide all of the productive stock, though he may agree to other modifi- 
cations of this system, permitting such adjustment as to make fair a 
half-and-half sharing of the income. 

General Farms Leasing Practices. — In general farming, as well as in 
grain farming, the tenant may furnish the tools and horses and pay 
the landlord as rent one-half, two-fifths, one-third, two-sevenths, or 
one-fourth of the crops, according to the local conditions. In other 
instances, the landlord may furnish all of the equipment and take two- 
thirds of the crops or more rarely only one-half. On cotton farms where 
the tenant furnishes all equipment, he receives two-thirds or three- 



FARM TENANCY 573 

fourths of the cotton, while if he supplies only the labor he receives one- 
half of the cotton. 

These few cases may be taken to illustrate the types of share leasing 
systems in which the landlord receives a certain fractional part of all 
crops and products of a given farm rather than different fractions for 
different crops. A study of actual leases shows that, aside from large 
estates where a uniform contract is prescribed for all tenants on a given 
estate, there are rarely two lease contracts containing identical 
stipulations. 

Leases vary in their main features and in almost innumerable less 
important details. They differ in the method of sharing equipment, 
expense, and proceeds. They show how greatly varied have been the 
attempts to balance one item of expense or equipment with another. 
They may specify a long list of items of expense, equipment, privileges, 
perquisites, restrictions, reservations, etc., which are not shared but are 
to be borne or enjoyed exclusively either by the landlord or by the tenant. 
The money value of these expenses and privileges cannot be known in 
advance, but only at the end of the year. These items may amount in 
the aggregate, however, to important sums for both parties. 

In some cases, no items of expense or privileges are shared. In 
such leases, the items are merely divided between landlord and tenant 
in a manner which is supposed to be more or less fair. The landlord 
may pay for the fertilizer, lime, grass seed, twine, etc., while the tenant 
pays for thrashing, grain seed, blue vitriol, and fuel. Both the tenant 
and landlord may enjoy a large number of privileges of which the money 
value is not determined or even approximately estimated. 

Leasing Practices in the Cotton Belt. — Throughout the cotton belt 
of the Southern States, interest in tenancy on the part of planters is for 
the purpose of securing a satisfactory supply of labor to grow cotton, and 
on the part of tenants to secure the best return for their ability to grow 
that crop. From the farm management standpoint, tenancy in the south 
is of more importance as a managerial problem than as a means of getting 
started, since the practice of letting small tracts to negro tenants does 
not tend to encourage white competition. In a publication giving 
something of conditions in the Yazoo-Mississippi Delta^*^ based on 878 
records taken in 1913 the methods of renting were found to be: 



574 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Table 244. — Leasing Practices in the Cotton Belt 



Method of renting 



Share cropping 



Share renting Cash renting 



Landlord furnishes 


Land 

House or cabin 


Land 

House or cabin 


Land 




House or cabin 




Tools 


Fuel 


Fuel 




Work stock 


One-fourth or 






Seed 


one- third of 






One-half of fertil- 


fertilizers 






izers 








Fuel 






Tenant furnishes 


Labor 

One-half of fertil- 


Labor 
Work stock 


Labor 




Work stock 




izers 


Feed for work 


Feed for work 




Three-fourths or 


stock 


stock 




two-thirds of 


Tools 


Tools 




fertilizers 


Seeds 


Seeds 


Landlord receives 


One-half of the 


One-fourth o r 


Fixed amount in 




crop 


one-third of the 


cash or lint cot- 






crop 


ton 


Tenant receives 


One-half of the 


Three-fourths or 


Entire crop less 




crop 


two-thirds of 
the crop 


fixed amount 



Fundamental Factors in Leasing Farm Lands. — Certain fundamentals 
have been pointed out as underlying the terms of leases.'** These are: 

The richer the farm, the larger the share going to the landlord. 

The poorer the land, the more the landlord must provide in the way of equip- 
ment, or else he must be wilhng to meet a greater proportion of operating expenses or 
accept a smaller share of the product. 

Increasing the distance from market decreases the landlord's share. 

The landlord's share is reduced in crops of high labor requirements as compared 
with those of low labor requirements, else he must be willing to meet a greater share 
of the operating expenses to offset the labor requirements. 

On average farms, labor offsets land; on other than average farms a division of 
investment in operating expense and equipment is necessary to balance the interests 
of both landlord and tenant. 

On the same farm, the tenant's share varies with different crops. 



CHAPTER XXIV 
FARM LEASE FORMS 

Since the great majority of lease contracts are for one year, and since 
the average period which the tenant remains on a farm is about three 
years, it is probable that each year about 2,000,000 lease contracts must 
be made or renewed. Consideration of the contract is thus important. 

Throughout the United States the terms of lease contracts vary so 
much in accordance with differences in type of farming and other local 
conditions that it is impossible in a single chapter to furnish detailed 
instructions that will apply to all these varied conditions. The discussion 
of the leasing system suitable for a given type of farming — such as dairy 
farming, grain farming, cotton farming, or fruit farming — would require 
several pages. 

The lease takes up in more or less detail the kinds of crops which are 
to be grown, the methods which are to be followed in producing, market- 
ing, and disposing of the crop; the use of manure and fertilizers; the dis- 
position of by-products; the number and kind of animals permitted on 
the land; the requirements as to ridding the land of weeds, squirrels, 
gophers, and the like; regulations covering the care of buildings, orchards, 
etc., and many other details which may be pertinent to the upkeep of the 
farm. 

Examples of Common Cash and Share Leases. — Brief leages are illus- 
trated herewith: 

Sample of Simple Cash Lease 

THIS INDENTURE, made this day of A.D 

BETWEEN and of the 

County of , State of , the parties of the first part, 

and , a corporation organized under the laws of the State of , 

and having its principal place of business at (City) 

(State) the party of the second part, 

WITNESSETH: That the said parties of the first part, do by these presents lease and demise unto 
the said party of the second part, all those certain pieces or parcels of land situate in the County of 
State of , described as follows, to wit: 

The Northeast quarter (N. E. \i) of section twenty four (24) in Township eight (8) South, Range 
seven (7) East, M. D. B. & M., being all of the land in said section owned by said parties of the first 
part. 

With the appurtenances, for the term of Five (5) years, from, the first day of February, A.D. 1920, at 
the ANNUAL rent or 'sum of ONE THOUSAND AND NO/lOO (1,000.00) Dollars, payable in Gold 
Coin of the United States of America, in advance, on the first day of each and every February, during 
said term. Five Hundred (500.00) dollars, to be paid to each of the aforesaid parties of the first part. 

575 



576 FARM MANAGEMENT 

AND IT IS FURTHER AGREED, that if any rent shall be due and unpaid, or if default shall be 
made in any of the covenants herein contained, it shall be lawful for the said parties of the first 
part to re-enter the premises, and remove all persons therefrom. And the said party of the second part 
does hereby covenant, promise and agree to pay the said parties of the first part the said rent, in the 
manner hereinbefore specified, and not to let or underlet the whole or any part of the said premises nor 
assign this lease, voluntarily or involuntarily, without the written consent of the said parties of the first 
part. 

And that, at the expiration of said term, the said party of the second part will quit and surrender 
the said premises in as good state and condition as reasonable use and wear thereof will permit (damage 
by the elements excepted). 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties to these presents have hereunto set their hands and 
seals, the day and year first above written. 
Signed, Sealed and Delivered 
in the Presence of 



(Seal) 

(Seal) 

(Seal) 

Example of Crop Share Lease 

THIS INDENTURE, Made this day of October, between the 

, the party of the first part, and the party 

of the second part: 

WITNESSETH: That the said party of the first part does hereby lease, demise and to farm let unto 
the said party of the second part the following described farm or parcel of land situated upon the ranch 

of the party of the first part in township, County of , 

State of , to wit: 

(description of land) 

TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same for the term of one year, commencing on the 1st day of 
November, , and ending on the 31st day of October, 

AND THE SAID party of the second part promises, covenants and agrees that he will not underlet 
any portion of said premises, nor assign this lease, without the written permission of the said party 
of the first part, its agent or attorney. That he will personally occupy and till said premises. That he 
will, during said term, keep all buildings, fences, corrals and other improvements now on said premises, 
or which may be put thereon during the term hereof by said party of the first part, in good repair, 
damage by fire excepted. That he will not commit or suffer waste to be committed thereon, and that 
the said party of .the second part further covenants that he will till and cultivate said premises in a good, 
farmerlike manner. That he will, in due and proper season, sow said premises to wheat, oats, or barley, 
or proportions of each according to seasonal conditions, and will harvest the same at his own cost, 
charge and expense, as soon as the same is suitable for harvesting. That he will, immediately upon 
harvesting the same, thresh, clean and sack in good, new merchantable sacks, all the grain of every 
description raised on said premises, and, as threshed and sacked, divide in the field and pile the same 
separately in the proportion of 3 and 1 , and that the latter part thereof for the party of the first part shall 
be piled as and for the yearly rental, and the said property of the party of the second part shall become the 
property of the party of the first part; but the party of the second part shall, upon request, haul the same 
to Santa Margarita Warehouse free of costs to the party of the first part. And all hay cut there on shall 
in like manner be delivered at the machine, as baled, and a like portion thereof set apart to the party of 
the first part, as their property, and be hauled, upon request, by the party of the second part, to Santa 
Margarita Warehouse without charge. 

AND IT IS MUTUALLY COVENANTED and agreed that until such delivery be made in the fields, 
as aforesaid, the party of the first part shall have a lien and charge upon the entire crop of hay and grain 
sown, growing or harvested, to the amount of $2,000 Gold Coin, estimated and fixed, and for the purpose 
of securing said party of the first part for the use and rental of said premises yearly and every year, 
as the value thereof, the party of the first part reserves the right to itself, agent, and attorney, to enter 
upon the premises at any time to make examination of the premises and crops. And, if they shall at 
any time deem themselves insecure and unsafe in the matter of the rental, they may take immediate 
possession of the leased premises to secure or harvest the crop, and may dispose of the same by sale or 
otherwise, accounting to the party of the second part for any excess actually realized by them over and 
above the rental of said premises, and all expenses incurred or paid to secure, harvest or make sale of 
crop. 



FARM LEASE FORMS 577 

IT IS FURTHER AGREED that the grain shall be harvested by a party to be agreed upon by the 
parties thereto, or that the sacksewer shall be a person named by the lessor and paid by the lessee, in 
order that no difficulty may arise as to the correctness of the count of sacks, or of crop. 

IT IS FURTHER AGREED that the party of the second part shall use reasonable care and dili- 
gence in ridding the property of ground squirrels, the material for the purpose to be furnished by the 
party of the first part. 



WITNESS the hands and seals of the said parties the day and year first above written. 

Signed, Sealed, and ^^^.^\\ 

Delivered in the .(.^^.*!). 

presence of .\..?.*..^. 



Notary Public 

Example of Partnership Lease. — In addition to the more common 
types of crop and stock leases are those ranging through wide extremes of 
terms and conditions. Some are drawn in a more or less indefinite way 
and worded in uncertain terms. In case of legal contests such leases are 
subject to many interpretations Leases of this nature are, however, 
usually drawn to permit use of land and equipment under very liberal 
terms, as between friend and friend, or relative and relative, executed in 
good faith, and never dragged into the legal arena. The example of such 
a lease, copied below, was drawn between friend and friend to perfect an 
arrangement whereby the owner would be relieved of further responsi- 
bility in directing and financing this particular farm. 

Example of Partnership Lease 

THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 19 , 

between of the City of and County of , 

State of hereinafter called the lessor, and of the County of 

State of , hereinafter called the lessee. 

WITNESSETH: The lessor hereby leases to the lessee, and the lessee does hereby hire and take 

from the lessor, the Ranch comprising Section , and portions of 

Sections , Township , Range County 

, State of , embracing acres, more or less, 

together with all buildings, pumping plants, farm equipment, tools, work-stock, dairy herd, hogs, hay, 
harvested grain, and any and all other personal property situate upon said Ranch, a particular inventory 

of which said property is hereto annexed and made a part hereof, for a term of years from 

and after the day of , 19 .... , and ending with the day of 

, 19 .... , upon the terms and conditions hereinafter stated. 

The lessee agrees, during the term aforesaid, to cultivate and farm said land and to conduct the farm- 
ing and hog and cattle raising and dairying operations upon said land, or ranch, in such manner as will, 
in his best judgment and discretion, insure the best possible results therefrom; and the lessor agrees that 
so long as the lessee diligently devotes his best knowledge, zeal, time and attention thereto, he will in no 
wise interfere with said operations. 

The lessee further agrees not to assign this lease, or any interest therein, nor to sublet said land or 
any part thereof to any person or persons to occupy or improve the same or to conduct any of the ranch 
or dairying operations thereon, without first obtaining the written consent of the lessor to do so. The 
lessee further agrees not to commit any waste, strip, or damage upon said land, nor permit or suffer any 
to be done; that he will keep all equipment, hereunder demised, and all fences and buildings upon said 
land in good repair, reasonable use and wear thereof and damage by fire, act of God and the elements 
excepted; and that he will keep all equipment, implements, tools, stock, crops growing or harvested, 
insured against loss by fire. 

The lessee further agrees to maintain the levees surrounding said land in good condition and repair 
and that he will keep the land hereunder demised, and the levees surrounding the same, free from mus- 
tard and weeds and that he will destroy and poison any squirrels and other vermin, if any, infesting the 
same. 

Any and all expense incurred by the lessee in the performance of any of the matters or things afore- 
said, and incurred by virtue of any agreement, covenant or understanding on his part heretofore con- 
37 



578 FARM MANAGEMENT 

tained, shall be considered "Operating Expense" of said Ranch, and the lessee personally agrees to 
annually advance for such "operating expenses" all sums required therefor, for any of which sums 
so advanced he shall be repaid and reimbursed all as hereinafter provided. 

The lessor agrees, during the term of this lease, to personally pay and discharge all taxes and assess- 
ments, reclamation or otherwise, levied upon said land, or lien thereon, and to personally discharge 
all premiums for insurance placed upon any of the improvements or buildings upon the demised land; 
and further agrees in the making of further improvements to said land, to advance, upon the request of 
the lessee for that purpose, such amounts as may be necessary for that purpose, not in excess of Two 
Thousand (2,000) Dollars. 

Full discretion in the conduct, operation, and management of said ranch, and sale of its products, 
is hereby granted to the lessee; any and all proceeds, howsoever arising from any farming, hog or cattle 

raising, or dairying operations, shall be received by and deposited by the lessee with the 

of , , in the name of , Trustee, which 

moneys so deposited the lessee is hereby authorized to use for the purpose of reimbursing himself to the 
extent of any and all moneys theretofore advanced by him for "operating expenses," and thereafter for 
"operating expenses" to the extent of Fifteen Thousand (15,000) Dollars, thereof, and no more; any 
and all balances of which said trust fund, upon and at the close of each year of the term hereof, shall be 
divided between the parties hereto, as hereinafter provided. 

At the close of each year of the term hereunder created, viz; on the day of 

of each year, a financial statement shall be prepared showing the gross receipts 

from any and all operations of whatsoever kind or character conducted upon said ranch during said 
year and all amounts howsoever advanced, or expended, by the lessee for "operating expenses;" 
and the balance thereafter remaining shall be divided between the parties hereto in the following pro- 
portions; 25 % thereof unto the lessee and 75 % thereof unto the lessor, which said amounts the parties 
hereto respectively agree shall be in full to the lessee for any and all advances by him to be hereunder 
made and services rendered, and to the lessor for the rental of the real and personal property hereunder 
demised. Should, however, said statement show a deficit, that is to say, should the amount advanced 
by the lessee for operating expenses be in excess of the gross proceeds, any and all such deficit shall be 
borne by the lessee as a loss for the year then ending, without right or claim against the proceeds or 
profits flowing from the operations of any succeeding year. 

The lessor further agrees that he will grant his consent to the sale by the lessee of any portion of the 
personal property hereunder demised if such sale be deemed desirable by the lessee either by reason of 
obsolescence or undesirability or unfitness of said personal property for any of the purposes for which 
the real and personal property hereunder demised being conducted and operated. The proceeds from 
any such sale may be applied by the lessee in the purchase of personal property either by way of replace- 
ment or substitution of that sold, or by way of addition thereto, in which events the property so acquired 
shall be considered as capital investment; and any and all balances remaining in the hands of the lessee, 
and not utilized or applied as aforesaid, shall be paid over by the lessee to the lessor. 

At the expiration of the term hereunder created, unless extended by mutual consent, and then at the 
close of any such extended term, the lessee agrees to deliver and surrender possession of the real and 
personal property hereunder demised in the same condition as by him received, reasonable use and wear 
thereof, and damage by fire, the act of God or the elements alone excepted: and that he will return to 
the lessor the equivalent of harvested and outstanding crops, the equivalent of weight and quality of hogs 
and a dairy herd of like quality, all as dehvered to him at the commencement of the term hereof, and 
as shown by the inventory to be taken at the commencement of said term and hereunto, or to be here- 
unto attached. The lessee, however, shall not be responsible for the loss of any work horses due from 
disease or natural causes. 

The lessee agrees to keep full and complete books of account of any and all matters or things in any 
wise relating to the operation and conduct of said ranch, showing any and all proceeds derived from said 
operations and any and all expenses of whatsoever kind and character incurred in and about the same, 
which said books of account shall be open to the inspection and examination of the lessor or his duly 
accredited agent at any and all reasonable times. The lessee further agrees at least once a month to 

furnish unto the lessor, at his office in the City of , County of , 

a written financial statement showing detailedly any and all operations of whatsoever kind or character, 
in any wise relating to the operation, conduct and management of said Ranch. 

Anything in this indenture of lease to the contrary hereinbefore contained notwithstanding, the 
lessor shall have the right to abbreviate the term of and to terminate this lease prior to the expiration 
thereof in the event of a bona fide sale of exchange of said Ranch upon the conditions following: 

Upon the reimbursement by the lessor the lessee of any and all amounts theretofore advanced by the 
lessee for operating expenses and by the further payment by the lessor to the lessee, during the first six 

months of the first year of the term of this lease, of a sum equal to per month for 

each and every month elapsed; and during the second year of the original term of this lease, and during 
any year of any extended term thereof, of a sum equal to such portion of the profit earned by the lessee 
during the preceding year as the period elapsed bears to one year, but in no event at a rate less than 
per month for each and every month elapsed. 



FARM LEASE FORMS 579 

The lessee further agrees that the lessor, by his representative or agent, may enter in and upon the 
demised premises, any and all portions therof , and buildings thereon, at all times during the term of this 
lease, and have free and unhindered access thereto for the purpose of ascertaining the condition of the 
lands and personality hereunder demised, and to satisfy himself of the due performance by the lessee 
all the covenants promises and undertakings on his part herein contained. 

WITNESS the hands and seals of the parties hereto this day and year first above written. 

Lessor 
Lessee 

Example of Stock-share Lease. — The following is a sample stock- 
share lease form for use on farms on which live stock is owned in common, 
as adopted by the landlord-tenant conference under the auspices of the 
Winnebago County Farm Improvement Association, held at Rbckford, 
111., January 31, 1916. It does not contain a clause stating how the lease 
may be renewed, but otherwise is sufficiently detailed. 

Sample Stock-Share Lease 

THIS INDENTURE, made and entered into this day of 19 by 

and between party of the first part, lessor, and party of the 

second part, lessee, witnesseth: 

DESCRIPTION OF THE LAND. — That the first party, in consideration of the agreements and 
stipulations hereinafter mentioned, to be kept and performed by party of the second part, has leased 
and does by these presents rent and lease unto the second party the following described real estate, 

situated in the district, county of . . , and the state of 

to wit: (Give exact location of the farm) 

LENGTH OF TENURE. — To have and to hold the said premises unto said second party from the 

first day of 19 at 12 M., to the first day of 19. . . ., at 12 M., 

and from year to year thereafter, and unless and until either party hereto shall, on or before September 
first of the calendar year, give notice in writing to the other party of the purpose, desire and intention 
to terminate said lease on the first of March following, or unless this contract shall be earlier terminated 
under and pursuant to the provision therefor herein contained. 

PLAN OF FARMING BUSINESS. — This leasing arrangement is known as a stock-share plan. 
The parties to this contract will cooperate fully according to the terms of this lease, in order that each 
may receive the largest returns consistent with a practical system of cropping and soil management, 
which shall maintain and even increase the fertility of the land, with the purpose that this farm shall not 
decrease in productiveness and value. 

The type of farming agreed upon is live stock, dairying, potatoes, and produc- 
tion. The plan is to feed most of the crops grown on the farm, depending upon the sale of live stock, 

dairy products, potatoes, and as the principal source of income. No hay, straw, 

corn stover, roughage or manure may be sold from the farm unless by written consent of party of the 
first part. 

(Outline of crop rotation) 

There shall be sown by the lessee each year not less than acres to clover or alfalfa with 

not less than eight pounds of clover or alfalfa seed to the acre. There shall be on the farm at all times 
not less than acres of good hay seeding. 

Lessee shall not sow more than acres of wheat or fall-sown grains during the fall 

previous to the termination of this lease or of this lease extended. 

Live stock owned by outside parties shall not be pastured, stabled, or boarded except by written 
consent of lessor. 

WHAT LESSOR FURNISHES.— The first party shall furnish the above farm, including the 
improvements thereon, and pay all taxes and insurance on said property. He shall furnish materials 
needed for improvements and repairs to real estate as needed, and shall furnish materials for other per- 
manent fences and other permanent improvements as mutually agreed upon. He shall also furnish not 

less than one ton of fertilizer each year. Lessor also agrees to furnish cows with 

the farm. 

WHAT LESSEE FURNISHES.— The second party shall furnish all work horses (not to exceed 
) to work the farm, shall furnish harnesses, implements, farm machinery, repairs on ma- 
chinery and shoeing on horses, and labor necessary to do all work required to conduct properly this farm- 
ing business as described in this agreement. He shall make all repairs and improvements where skilled 

labor is not required, except as herein specified. He shall haul from all feeds, 

fertilizers, building materials, tile, and all materials for repairing fences and buildings which may be 



580 FARM MANAGEMENT 

needed in the operation of the said farm. He shall haul from and spread on the land lime- 
stone (ground or burned), phosphates, and other fertilizers purchased by lessor for use on said farm, 
and he shall apply same in such places and in such manner as lessor may direct. He shall haul or drive 
to market all produce from the farm free to lessor. Lessee agrees to operate said farm in a workmanlike 
manner, and to do the necessary work in good season, and to care properly for the crops and live stock, 
preventing all unnecessary waste or loss or damage to lessor's property. He agrees to return all stock 
and personal property to lessor in as good condition as when received by him, ordinary aging and use 
and damage by fire, floods, wind or lightning excepted. He further agrees that he will not burn corn- 
stalks, straw or other vegetable matter grown upon said farm, but will spread all this material upon the 
land as manure when not fit as feed for Uve stock. 

WHAT LESSOR AND LESSEE SHALL FURNISH JOINTLY. — Lessor and lessee shall furnish 
jointly all seed grain, grass seed, clover and alfalfa seed sown on said farm during the period of this 

lease; also all live stock other than work horses and cows hereinbefore mentioned; and 

feed, including hired pasture if such becomes necessary for the same, including lessee's horses. All live 
stock, including lessee's horses, are to be fed from undivided feed; it is understood, therefore, that lessee's 
horses while so fed shall be used only in the work of the farm. They shall furnish binder twine and all 
fuel for tank heater, threshing, corn shredding, silage cutting, clover hulling, and pay machine bills for 
the same. They shall pay jointly all veterinary fees and stallion service fees. Each party shall pay one- 
half of all taxes and insurance on all personal property owned in common; shall share equally in all pro- 
ceeds from the sale of live stock, poultry, grain, and other produce raised on said farm. Butter used by 
either party shall not be obtained from the said farm dairy. Each party shall gather and keep his own 
share of the fruit. Buying and selling of materials, live stock and other farm produce shall be left largely 
with the lessee, but all sales and purchases of more than five dollars (-$5.00) shall be made with knowledge 
and consent of the lessor. All feeds on the said farm at the beginning of this lease shall be appraised by 
a committee of three, and one-half of the value of the same shall be paid to lessor by lessee, the committee 
to be madeup of disinterested parties and appointed as follows: One man each by lessor and lessee and 
these to select a third one. All business in the way of payments and receipts shall be by checks and 
deposits through the Bank of 

LESSEE'S SPECIAL PRIVILEGES. — Lessee may have potatoes, garden truck and such fruit as 
the farm affords, milk, poultry and eggs for family use only. Lessee shall not keep boarders other than 
those that are being employed for actual farm operations or employed in the making of improvements oa 
the farm. Lessee is to have necessary fuel from fallen timber for house use, and if this be not sufficient 
lessor agrees that lessee may cut and use trees not fit for lumber that have been marked by lessor for 
cutting. 

LESSOR'S SPECIAL PRIVILEGES: — No timber shall be sold by party of the second part, nor 
shall the receipts from the sale of timber be shared by party of the second part. Lessor may sell or 
contract to sell timber from the farm without consent of lessee, and the receipts from the same are not 
to be governed by this contract. Right-of-way to timber shall be given by lessee to lessor, his assigns 
or representatives, for the removal of timber. 

LIVE STOCK. — Both lessor and lessee shall own in common, each an undivided one-half, all live 
stock, excepting as hereinbefore provided for, owned and produced upon said farm; and such of said 
stock as parties shall agree upon shall be sold at such time as may be satisfactory to both. All stock 
brought onto the farm that is to be owned jointly shall be appraised by a committee of three to be 
selected as follows: One man to be selected by each party and these to select a third one. Settlement 
for such live stock between lessor and lessee shall be made on the basis of such appraisal. Work horses 
owned by lessee shall be three years or more of age. Colts raised on the farm or brought onto the farm 
shall be owned in common, each an undivided one-half, until they are three years of age, at which time 

they shall be sold unless sold previous to that age. Lessee agrees that any or all of the cows 

furnished by lessor may be replaced at the discretion of lessor with young ones produced on said farm. 
The young cow is owned jointly until the cow she replaces is sold. The money received for the returned 
cow is to be divided equally between the parties. If none of the young cows reared on said farm suit 

lessor he may sell at any time any or all of the cows furnished or owned by him and 

receive all the receipts derived therefrom, in which case he must replace the aforesaid cows within 

sixty days. It is also agreed to keep a registered bull of the breed at the head of the herd, 

to be purchased and owned jointly, said bull to be mutually satisfactory to both parties; to maintain not 

less than cows on said farm and that the heifer calves from the best cows are to be 

raised each year so as to maintain or increase the size of the herd and improve its quality. 

HOW MONEY IS TO BE DIVIDED OR INVESTED WHEN CROPS OR LIVE STOCK ARE 
SOLD. — Whenever any cattle, hogs, or any other products of said farm shall be sold, the proceeds shall 
be equally divided between the parties, or if agreed upon it may again be invested in other stock, grain 
or material for the common use and benefit of the parties. Settlement for all receipts and expenses 
that have been received and paid during any calendar month shall be settled for between the parties at 
the end of that month. Drafts or checks for the share of the lessor, together with signed statements 
by purchasers of all products sold, where a sale is in excess of two dollars, shall be rendered to the lessor. 
Receipts, also bills, for all purchases paid for by lessee during the calendar month shall accompany 
the statement, of the month's settlement. 



FARM LEASE FORMS 581 

NOXIOUS WEEDS TO BE DESTROYED, AND WORiaiANSHIP OF LESSEE— Lessee 
further covenants and agrees that he will farm said land in good, farnierlike and workmanhke manner; 
that he will not commit any waste or suffer injury to be done to the premises; that he will allow no nox- 
ious weeds to go to seed on said premises, and that he will keep the weeds and grass cut along the road- 
sides adjoining the farm. 

MANURE: — Lessee also agrees that he will draw out and scatter on said premises daily, or as 
frequently as weather and ordinary farm conditions will permit, all manure; that he will scatter it where 
most needed; and that the yards shall be cleaned up on or before December first of each year of all 
manure, and that in default of so drawing out and scattering of manure, he shall pay to lessor as penalty 
the sum of fifty dollars ($50). 

CARE OP THE PREMISES. — Lessee agrees that he will keep the buildings, fences, and other 
improvements on said premises in as good repair and condition as the same are in when he goes into 
possession or as good as they may be put in during said lease, loss by fire, inevitable accident, and 
ordinary wear excepted; that he will not assign this lease or sub-let any part of said premises without 
the written consent of lessor; that he will not bring mortgaged property upon said premises without 
consent of said lessor; that he will not undertake any operation that will injure said land. 

SURRENDER OF POSSESSION. — That in case lessee shall, from any cause, neglect, refuse or be 
unable to properly prepare said land, sow, plant, harvest, or care for any and all crops to be raised on 
said land, said lessor, his agents, heirs, or assigns, may at option, upon twenty-four (24) hours' notice 
to lessee, enter upon said premises and take possession thereof, and of the crops growing or being grown 
hereon, and properly care for the same, and sell the same, and the proceeds remaining after the payment 
of the rents, cost and expense and damages, shall go to the lessee; that he will surrender the stubble land, 
for the purpose of plowing, in the fall preceding the termination of this lease, as soon as the crop has 
been removed from the same; that he will surrender possession of said premises at the end of the term, 
or sooner termination thereof; and if immediate possession be not given that he will pay lessor or assigns 
the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) for each and every day possession is thus withheld as damages for 
nonsurrender. 

LIEN ON PROPERTY OF LESSEE. — That a failure to keep and perform any of the agreements 
hereinbefore mentioned shall, at the option of said lessor or assigns, operate as a forfeiture of this lease, 
and terminate the term and said lessor may take possession of the premises at once, without process of 
law; or he may bring an action at law for possession, said lessee being, from the date of such forfeiture, 
a tenant holding over after the expiration of his term, and his continued occupancy of said premises 
thereafter shall be alone a tenancy at the will of the lessor and not otherwise; that in consideration of this 
lease, and the agreements herein contained on the part of the lessor, said lessee covenants and agrees to 
keep and perform the agreements hereinbefore set forth, hereby covenanting that moneys due from him 
to said lessor for plowing, or damages or otherwise, shall be and hereby are declared and made a per- 
petual lien on any and all crops, stock and other personal property of the lessee at any time kept, had, 
or used on said premises, whether the same are exempt from execution or not, such lien to attach from 
the commencement of this lease. 

LESSOR'S RIGHT OF ENTRY. — Said lessor reserves the right of himself, his employes or assigns 
to enter upon said premises at any time, for the purpose of viewing the same or making repairs or 
improvements thereon, the same not to interfere with the occupancy of the lessee, and reserves the right 
of himself or agent to enter upon said premises for the purpose of plowing in the fall preceding the termi- 
nation of this lease. 

LESSEE'S REWARD FOR FARM IMPROVEMENTS. — It is understood and agreed by both 
parties that the lessee's reward for farm improvements which he is required to make according to the 
terms of this contract shall come in the increased yields and greater returns which should result, and which 
will be shared by the lessee if he continues to lease said farm. But in case this lease is terminated within 
five years after the improvement is made the lessee shall receive compensation for improvements, such 
as hauling and spreading rock phosphate and ground limestone, seeding clover and alfalfa, laying drain- 
age tile, building fence and stump pulling, when made on written authority by lessor, as follows: If 
the lease is terminated before any crop is received following an application of rock phosphate or ground 
limestone lessee shall receive one dollar for each ton hauled and spread; if terminated after one crop has 
been received off the land, eighty cents; if a second crop has been taken off, sixty cents; if a third crop 
has been taken off; forty cents; if a fourth crop has been taken off, twenty cents; and if a fifth crop has 
been taken off no compensation at all; for seeding clover or alfalfa, one dollar per acre if no crop has been 
taken off; eighty cents if a second crop has been taken off; sixty cents if a third crop has been taken off; 
for building fences — fifteen cents per rod if the lease terminates within one year from the time the 
improvement has been made; twelve cents per rod if two years has elapsed; nine cents if three years has 
elapsed; six cents if four years has elapsed; and three cents if five years has elapsed. Lessee shall be 
compensated for other new, permanent improvements, that may be performed upon written authority 
of lessor, if correct account of the labor by days has been kept and a statement has been rendered to the 
lessor at the time of making the improvements as follows: If the lease is terminated within one year 
from the time that the improvement was made, the lessee shall be paid full valve of the statement 
rendered; if within two years, four-fifths of the statement rendered; if within three years, two-fifths; 
and if within five years, one-fifth. 



582 FARM MANAGEMENT 

HOW DIVISION SHALL BE MADE AT END OF TERM.— At the end of the term of this lease an 
accounting shall be had between the respective parties hereto, and each kind of produce, stock, etc., 
upon said farm belonging jointly to lessor and lessee, shall be equally divided by lessee into two equal 
shares, as near as may be, the lessor to take his choice, and such choice to be final. And if proper 
settlement cannot be made in that way, all the parties hereto agree to have a public sale upon the 
premises for the purpose of effecting such settlement. Since silage is an article that is not salable to 
outside parties, lessor agrees that he will pay to lessee at the termination of this lease, for lessee's share 
of the silage at the rate of three dollars per ton. 

CONCERNING VERBAL AGREEMENTS.— Verbal statements and agreements are not valid 
if contrary to this contract, and are never valid unless reduced to written form and signed by the party 
or parties making them. 

LIABILITY OF EACH PARTY.— Neither party shall have the right to bind the other party by 
any contract outside the scope of this agreement, except with the consent of the other, unless herein- 
before provided for. Nor shall either party hereto have any authority, right or power to create any 
debt or obligation in the name or resting upon the other; and under no condition or circumstance shall 
the relation created by this instrument constitute or be interpreted as constituting a partnership, or 
other than that of lessor and lessee. 

Signature blanks and notary's blank follow here. 

What the Lease Should Contain. — In drawing up a lease it should be 
borne in mind that a lease is a contract, when duly signed and delivered, 
providing for the possession and income of designated lands for a stated 
period in consideration of value given. 

Forms of leases vary, as already indicated, between wide extremes. 
Tichenor, in his book on "Farm Contracts between Landlord and Tenant " 
(published by the author, W. C. Tichenor, Lebanon, Ohio, 1916,' revised 
1919), presents 29 extremely different forms collected from ten north 
central states. 

A lease should: 

(a) Be written. 

(6) Conform to state and federal statutes. This covers witnessing, recording, 
revenue stamps, etc. 

(c) Be as brief as consistent with presentation of all essential facts. 

(d) Be worded as simply and clearly as possible. 

Form of the Lease. ^'*^ Lease Should Be Written. — A written lease is 
more satisfactory than a verbal one, since, if one of the parties should die, 
a written contract protects the estate; a written lease is likely to be more 
carefully considered by both parties, and its terms defined with greater 
precision; it serves as a memorandum to both parties, so that the actual 
terms of the contract may not easily be forgotten. In practically all of 
the States the statutes provide that a lease for a period longer than that 
specified by statute (commonly 3 years) shall be considered as creating 
only an estate at will, unless the contract is in writing and unless it com- 
plies with the requirements specified with regard to signatures, witnesses, 
and other formalities. 

Use of Printed Forms. — Standard printed forms for farm lease con- 
tracts may often be obtained from printing establishments, stationers, 
lawyers' offices, and banks.. Such forms usually contain insufficient space 
for the numerous special conditions of a complicated farm lease. How- 
ever, a standard lease form may be of assistance in providing legal ter- 



FARM LEASE FORMS 583 

minology and such legal specifications as may be peculiar to the laws of a 
given State. It is desirable that the landlord and tenant agree on the 
terms of the contract and then prepare a lease embodying these agree- 
ments. After the terms of the lease are agreed upon, an attorney may 
be consulted, if desired, to aid in giving the correct legal form. 

Legal Requirements. — The legal essentials to the validity of a lease 
contract are definite agreements as to (a) the extent and bounds of the 
property leased; (6) the term of the lease; (c) rate of rent, together with 
specifications of time and method of payment. It is not usually necessary 
that a lease contract be recorded in order to be valid, but recording may 
have the advantage of serving notice to third parties of the existence of 
the contract. However, in probably a majority of the States the physical 
possession of the property by the tenant is held to constitute notice to 
third parties of his rights in the property. 

Points to be Considered in the Farm Lease ^^^ 

The following is a list of items that should be considered in the making 
of the farm lease. While, all possible points are not covered, the list 
does contain the more common and the more important considerations. 
Since cash renting is much simpler than renting on shares, there are many 
points in the hst which do not apply to cash leases. 

General Details. — 

1. Date lease is made. 

2. Names and formal designations of landlord and tenant. 

In framing any legal contract it is important to designate accurately the respec- 
tive parties. It is customary to use the terms "party of the first part" and "party 
of the second part " to designate the respective parties. If one of the parties comprises 
more than one person, the expression should be plural — as, for instance, "parties of 
the second part." In order to shorten and simpUfy the contract if may be well to 
define the meaning of these expressions at the beginning of the lease. Such a defini- 
tion may read as follows: 

This agreement, made this first day of March, 1920, between John Smith, party 
of the first part, hereafter called "the landlord," and Richard Brown, party of the 
second part, hereafter called "the tenant," witnesseth, etc. 

3. Number of years lease is to run and dates of beginning and ending. 

The date of beginning the lease year differs in various sections of the country, but 
is usually made to coincide with the time of year when the more important crops have 
been harvested and sold and before preparations for crops of the following harvest 
begin. In the Corn Belt, March 1 is the customary date; in the South, January 1; 
in regions where winter wheat is the principal crop, August 1. 

4. Statement of manner by which the lease is to be terminated or 
renewed. 

5. Brief description of the real estate leased, including name of farm, 
boundaries, and location with respect to State, county, township, and 
section. 



584 FARM MANAGEMENT 

6. Description of other property included with the real estate in the 
lease. 

7. Types of farming to be followed. 
Reservations. — 

8. Right of entry by the landlord for purpose of inspecting buildings 
and other improvements, crops, and live stock, for making repairs and 
improvements, for work in connection with crops of the following harvest 
and for other purposes. 

The landlord should reserve a right of entry, even when he does not participate 
in supervision of farm operations. Such reservation may be expressed as follows: 

The landlord reserves the privilege of going upon said farm at any time and at all 
times to look after his interests, to do work and to have work done, either personally 
or by agent, employee or employees, without being liable in damages. 

9. Reservation by the landlord of parts of buildings, granary 
space, corn cribs, mow space, and any other portion of the real estate the 
use of which it is agreed he shall reserve. 

10. Reservations and restrictions with respect to the use of pasture, 
fruit, woods, timber, sand pits, gravel beds, fish, and game. 

11. Reservation of the right to decide or direct farming operations. 

12. Reservation of the right to buy or sell live stock, crops, produce, 
or supplies for farm use. 

13. Limitations on the kind, amount, or value of property which may 
be bought or sold without informing the landlord and getting his consent. 

14. Designation of a bank in which undivided funds are to be kept 
or deposited, with agreement as to the disposition or use of these funds. 

15. On share rented farms, a statement denying, acknowledging, or 
limiting partnership relation. 

The relationship of landlord and tenant is not ordinarily that of a partnership. 
The latter involves joint liability to an unlimited extent for all debts created by either 
party in the name of the firm, equal voice in the management of the business, and other 
conditions not characteristic of the relation of landlord and tenant. Because the 
terms of many lease contracts, especially the so-called stock share leases, are of such 
a character as to suggest the actual relationship to be a partnership, it is customary 
to include a clause in the lease disavowing the partnership. 

A clause containing such a disavowal may read as follows: 

"Said parties to this lease shall be in no sense partners. Neither shall bind the 
other to any obligations nor incur debts for the payment of which the other party 
might be liable without the written consent of that party." 

16. Reservation of the right to sell the farm, with statement of adjust- 
ments to be made in case of sale. 

If a lease is but for one year, it is probably unnecessary that it contain a sale 
clause, but in case of a lease for several years such a clause may be inserted. The 
following will illustrate this type of clause : 

It is hereby agreed that, in case of sale of said premises during the occupancy of 
said second party, and in case the purchaser should desire possession, said second party 



FARM LEASE FORMS 585 

hereby agrees to give up to said purchaser said premises at once on payment to the 
said second party of a fair and reasonable compensation for such surrender, and if he 
and the purchaser can not agree as to the amount of such compensation it shall be 
left to three disinterested appraisers, of whom said second party shall choose one, the 
purchaser one, and the two so chosen shall choose a third one. Their decision shall 
be final as to the amount to be paid by the purchaser to said second party. 

Assurances and Guaranties by the Tenant. — 

17. To operate the farm in a good and farmerhke manner. 

18. Not to sublet the farm. 

The assignment of a lease contract by one tenant to another is a matter of con- 
siderable concern to the landlord, for on the personal honesty and efficiency of the 
tenant may depend the amount of rent (in case of share contracts), the security of 
the rent payment, and the care of the property intrusted to the tenant. Although the 
assignment of a lease by a landlord is not usually a matter of great concern to a tenant, 
it is as well to include in the contract a clause forbidding such an assignment without 
the consent of both parties, as follows: 

Except in case of sale, as provided above, this lease shall not be assigned or trans- 
ferred to anyone unless on written consent of both parties, and no one but the party 
of the second part, his family, and hired help shall occupy the premises or any part 
thereof during the term of this contract, nor shall the premises or any part thereof 
be sublet without the written consent of the first party. 

19. To occupy the farm continuously throughout the lease period. 

20. Not to attempt to operate outside land in addition; not to thrash 
for outsiders as a business ; not to give preference to any other work over 
the operation of the farm. 

21. Not to rent out work stock, implements, or other property 
owned by the landlord. 

22. To work for the landlord if requested, at specified rates, when not 
engaged in work on the farm. 

23. To commit no waste or damage, and suffer none to be committed; 
to protect and care for the buildings, fences, trees, and other property. 

Whether the land is rented for cash or for share rent the landlord should be 
interested in insuring the care and preservation of his land and improvements. Noth- 
ing will serve to accomplish this result so much as careful supervision by the landlord 
or his representative. However, the landlord's position may be strengthened if 
provision is made in the contract requiring the tenant to take proper care of the 
property intrusted to him. Such provisions may be in general terms or detailed. If 
the latter, there may be great differences in the actual provisions according to the 
special circumstances and terms of the agreement. 

The following is a general clause which provides against unnecessary waste or 
damage: 

The party of the second part, the tenant, agrees that he will not commit or suffer 
to be committed any waste, damage, or strip of s&id premises, as, for instance, cutting 
wires, removing sections of fence, failing to oil pumps and windmills, or tearing down 
fences for purposes not required in the ordinary course of farming. 

If the tenant is expected to keep buildings and fences in repair, as is generally the 
case, a clause such as the following may be written into the lease: 

The party of the second part agrees to keep the buildings, fences, and other 



586 FARM MANAGEMENT 

improvements on said premises in as good repair and condition as the same are when 
he takes possession, or as good as they may be put in by the lessor during the term of 
the lease, ordinary wear, loss by fire, or unavoidable destruction excepted. 

Among the details that may be specified with respect to care of the premises, are 
to keep the windmill and other pumping machinery properly oiled and cared for and 
to repair any damage to such machinery, except when damage is due to action of the 
elements; to take proper care of trees, ornamental vines, and shrubbery about the 
buildings, in the yard and garden, and to prevent injury to them; to cut all hedges 
at least twice each season and to burn the brush if of considerable amount; to keep 
open all necessary ditches; and to keep buildings and fences in good repair. 

24. To make inventories at stated periods and to keep records of 
farm yields, acreage, purchases, sales, breeding of live stock, and to give 
the landlord access to these records. 

25. To yield peaceable possession at the termination of the lease. 

Assurance of peaceable possession at termination of the lease may be provided for 
as follows: 

The second partj^ covenants and agrees with the first party that at the expiration 
by this lease, by limitation or otherwise, he will yield up possession of said premises 
in as good condition as they are at the beginning of this lease, natural wear and damage 
excepted, and that he expressly waives any and all notice to terminate, except as 
herein specifically required, and upon demand of the first party will pay ten dollars 
for each day the premises are occupied after such expiration unless the written consent 
of the landlord for such continued occupancy shall have been given. 

26. Not to bring on the premises mortgaged property that may have 
the effect of impairing the landlord's lien. 

Assurances and Guaranties by the Landlord. — 

27. To make concessions with respect to rent and other obligations 
of the tenant in the event of disaster to the farm operations as the 
result of fire, flood, drought, pestilence, or other conditions over which 
the tenant has no control. 

28. To provide peaceable possession, or to protect the tenant's 
interests, in event of litigation or seizure of the landlord's title by a 
mortgage or other claimant. 

29. To release to the tenant the residue of crops, live stock, and other 
products remaining after the rent or rent share is paid and the landlord's 
lien satisfied. 

Agreements with Respect to Credit Furnished by the Landlord. — 

30. Terms on which the landlord is to make advances of money or 
supplies to the tenant for the purpose of operating the farm. 

31. Special and occasional credits to make possible the purchase of 
live stock and feed, or with respect to the feeding of crops to live stock. 

32. Terms of loans on farm implements, work stock, productive 
stock, or other property of which the tenant is to be the nominal owner or 
part-owner. 

Respective Contributions by each Party to Operating Capital. — 

33. General farming machinery, running gear, small tools, and 
harness, with provision for replacement and repair. 



FARM LEASE FORMS 587 

34. Special farm machinery not commonly employed, such as manure 
spreader, lime or fertilizer distributer, spraying outfit, silage cutter and 
engine, milking machine, gasoline engine, thrashing machine, tractor 
and tractor equipment, with provision for replacement and repair. 

35. Horses and other work stock. 

36. Productive live stock, including cattle, hogs, sheep, and poultry. 
Adjustments with Respect to Property Owned in Joint Account. — 

37. Method of appraising the value of property of either party taken 
over for joint account. 

38. Method of dividing property jointly owned at termination of lease. 

39. Settlement for undivided crops, products, or suppHes used by the 
tenant in his household, for his horses, or for other stock. 

Respective Contributions by Each Party to Expenses. — 

40. Contributions of labor and special services: 

(a) Amount of labor to be contributed by each party to general farm work. 
(6) Special arrangements with respect to the employment of members of the 
tenant's family. 

(c) Arrangements with respect to extra hired labor and labor engaged in thrashing, 
silo filling, baling, shredding, clover hulhng, and other operations involving the 
employment of machines not owned by the tenant. 

(d) Responsibility of the respective parties with regard to hauling and delivery of 
crops, milk, and other farm products, hauling supplies for farm use, hauling tile, sand, 
lumber, fencing, and other materials used in making farm improvements. 

(e) Furnishing of skilled labor or unskilled labor employed in fencing, tiling, repair 
or construction of buildings, drilling of wells, or other work of farm improvement. 

(/) Contribution of labor employed in mowing, grubbing or pulling weeds and 
brush, cleaning ditches and drainage outlets. 

(!7) Contribution of labor employed in keeping up fences and in incidental patching 
and repairs to improvements. 

(h) Arrangements for the board and lodging of outside labor, particularly of labor 
employed by the landlord on farm improvements. 

41. Expenses on account of live stock: 

(a) Use of feed purchased or produced on the farm. What stock may be fed from 
undivided feed and what stock may not be so fed. Limitations on the amount of 
undivided feed which may be used for different classes of stock or on the number of 
stock which may be fed. 

(b) Breeding and veterinary fees; cow testing, registration, and exhibition fees; 
live stock insurance; horseshoeing and other incidental expenses in connection with 
productive live stock or work stock. 

(c) Sharing of losses from injury, depreciation, or death of Uve stock. 

42. Other expenses : 

(a) For seed, including grass, clover, alfalfa, and cover crops, general farm crops 
and plants or trees used in the raising of truck crops, small fruits, orchards and woodlot 
plantings. 

(b) For setting out or caring for fruit, ornamental trees, hedges, and woodlots. 



588 FARM MANAGEMENT 

(c) For barrels, boxes, crates, bags, bagging, baskets, cans, and other containers. 

{d) Manure, lime, phosphates, and other fertilizers. 

(e) Spray material for field crops and fruit trees, material for treatment of seed 
and inoculation of soil for legumes. 

(/) Machine bills for threshing, ginning, shredding, baling, silo filling, clover 
hulling, and corn shelling. 

ig) For binder twine, coal, gasoUne, and oil for farm use. 

{h) For telephone. 

(i) Storage, freight, buying, and marketing costs. 

ij) Insurance on farm crops, feed, supplies, and implements. 

It is usually the custom for the landlord to pay the expense of insuring buildings. 
Since fire insurance contracts may become invalid through failure of the insured party 
to protect the property insured against unnecessary hazards, it may be necessary 
for the landlord to include in the lease contract a clause such as the following: 

The party of the second party covenants and agrees not to do, suffer, or permit to 
be done any act in violation of any provisions of any policy of insurance upon any of 
the crops, buildings, or other property upon said premises or which shall increase the 
premium thereon. 

{k) Taxes on property other than real estate, water assessments, and irrigation 
ditch upkeep. 

The landlord usually assumes the responsibility for all real estate taxes, both in 
cash and share leases. Occasionally, however, the tenant agrees to work out the 
road tax. Taxes on operating equipment, live stock, and other property are usually 
paid by the owner of such capital, being shared when the property is jointly owned. 

{I) Real estate insurance and taxes, including school taxes. 

(m) Expenses for hiring additional pasture and other land outside of the regular 
farm area. 

Payment of Rent. — 

43. Cash rent for entire farm or portions thereof, with specifications 
as to amount, time, and place payable. 

44. Rent payable in terms of a fixed quantity of a farm product, with 
specifications as to amount, quality, time and place payable. 

45. Share rent of the various farm products, with specifications con- 
cerning time, place, method of division, and responsibility of tenant for 
delivery. 

46. Specified quantities of milk, butter, eggs, firewood, feed, fruit, 
and other products for landlord's household use, and arrangements with 
respect to delivery of the same. 

Privileges for Which Special Rent Is or Is Not To Be Paid.— 

47. The farmhouse, habitation for laborers, and buildings for live 
stock, tools, and crops harvested. 

48. Garden spot and pasturage for limited number of stock. 

49. Use of small areas of land for raising special forage crops. 

50. Use of fruit, firewood, milk, eggs, butter, and other products for 
tenant's household, or for laborers. 

51. Use of undivided grain, hay, or other crops for live stock kept 
by the tenant for his personal advantage. 



FARM LEASE FORMS 589 

Specifications with Respect to the Care, Use, and Improvement of 
Real Estate and Arrangement for Labor and Materials or Needed for 
These Purposes. — 

52. Fruit, shade trees, forest trees, and down timber. 

53. Drains, ditches, bridges, and roads. 

54. Time, frequency, and manner of mowing weeds and brush in 
pasture. 

55. Windmill, engine, and pumps. 

56. Buildings, fences, and gates. 

Specifications with Respect to Farming Methods and Procedure. — 

57. Specifications as to acreage, location, and rotation of various crops. 

58. Enumeration of crops which may not be raised. 

59. Special regulations with respect to the method of growing each 
crop, including the details with respect to preparation of the land, time 
and manner of planting, kind of seed, method of manuring or fertilization, 
subsequent care, harvesting, storage, and marketing, or time and manner 
of division. 

60. Limitations or restrictions on the sale or removal of crops, on the 
pasturage of crops, and on the burning or removal of straw, fodder, 
manure, etc. 

61. Number and kinds of live stock to be kept and the upper and lower 
limits of the same. 

62. Regulations with regard to the number of stock which shall be 
allowed to run on pasture and times when pastures may or may not be 
used. 

63. Provision for the ringing of hogs and prohibition of the keeping 
of breachy live stock. 

Specifications respecting the methods of farming and the procedure to be followed 
may be made clearer if, in making them a part of the lease, they are accompanied by 
a map of the farm. Such a map may show such details as the use made of the land in 
past years, previous rotation systems, present use of the land, rotations to be followed 
in the future, the drainage system, past and present policies with respect to clearing, 
liming, manuring, and fertilizing. 

Provision for Supervision. — 

64. Provision with respect to kind and extent of supervision for which 
each party will be responsible. 

Procedure at Termination of Lease. — 

65. Disposition of crops growing, unfed or unsold, or of feed and 
supplies remaining on hand. 

66. Disposition of farming equipment, work animals, and other live 
stock owned on joint account. 

67. Specification of number of acres which must be left plowed, 
seeded down, planted in wheat or- other crops, or in pasture. 



590 FARM MANAGEMENT 

68. Compensation for improvements made by the tenant, including 
construction of buildings and fences, digging of wells, drainage work, 
clearing of land, setting out trees and small fruits, planting of hops, aspara- 
gus, rhubarb, or other perennial plants. 

69. Compensation for unexhausted additions made by the tenant to 
the fertility of the soil. 

70. Authority for removal of improvements made by the tenant with- 
out assistance or compensation by the landlord, such as fences, hog 
houses, corn cribs, water troughs. 

71. Settlement of outstanding indebtedness. 
Enforcement of Contract. — 

72. Provisions for enforcement. 

It is desirable to include in a lease clauses providing methods for enforcing the 
contract. Enforcement clauses may deal specifically with (a) the performance of 
farm work, the making of repairs and other duties assumed by the tenant; (b) gross 
damage to the property rented through neglect or, wilful injury; (c) the making 
of repairs, the furnishing of capital, the supplying of live stock and equipment, and 
other obligations assumed by the landlord; (d) the payment of rent. The first of 
these considerations is especially important in a share-rent contract. 

Adjustment of Differences. — 

73. Provision for the settlement of disputes and differences of opinion 
by arbitration or otherwise. 

The above somewhat strict provisions for enforcing the terms of the contract 
should be regarded as safeguards to be applied only in last resort. Misunderstandings 
and litigation between landlord and tenant are likely to be very expensive to both 
parties. So far as possible, it is desirable to anticipate points of conflict and provide 
for them when the contract is made, for at that time both parties are anxious to agree. 
If both parties have the right spirit, any subsequent unfore.seen difficulties can be 
adjusted by mutual agreement. However, there may be occasions when disputes 
arise which can not be so settled. Provision for adjusting such disputes may read as 
follows : 

If the parties hereto are unable to agree upon any matter not definitely determined 
by this lease, each shall choose a referee, and they two shall choose a third, which three 
shall make a decision, and their decision shall be binding upon the parties hereto. 
None of said referees shall be related to either party or have any interest indirectly 
and directly, personally or otherwise, in the questions decided. 

Provisions to Insure Enforcement. — 

74. Provision for fulfillment of terms of the contract by heirs, exe- 
cutors, administrators, or assigns, in the event of death or disability of 
one or both parties. 

75. Conditions that will constitute a forfeiture of the lease, and 
method of determining rights of landlord and of tenant in the event of 
termination by forfeiture. 

76. Provision for penalty to be paid by either party according to a 
stated scale in the event of failure to perform certain agreements in the 
contract. 



FARM LEASE FORMS 591 

77. Right of the owner to have work which is neglected by the tenant 
performed at the tenant's expense. 

78. Acknowledgment of the existence of a lien to secure to the land- 
lord the payment of the rent and the performance of specified agreements. 

Final Details. — 

79. Signatures of the parties and their witnesses. 

80. Sealing and recording. 

Proposed Standard Contract Forms for Leases. — Recent agricultural 
bulletins, both State and Federal, contain contract forms for leases 
considered as satisfactory. 

Benton, in a Minnesota publication!^^ offers forms for each of three 
different kinds of leases: 

1. A half-share crop lease. 

2. A half-share crop and live stock lease. 

3. A cash lease. 

Johnson and Green offer ^^^ model forms for: 

1. Cash-rent farm lease. 

2. Share-rent farm lease. 

3. Partnership-agreement farm lease. 

Sample leases in force in Wisconsin are published in a Wisconsin 
Bulletin !^° to show typical leases covering: 

1. Cash. 

2. Half- and half-dairy. 

Discussion of other forms follow, as, for instance, the : 

1. Land-and-stock cash. 

2. Landlord's cattle dairy lease. 

3. One-half-all-stock lease. 

4. One-third-stock lease. 

5. Grain leases. 

6. Mixed grain and stock. 

Suggested Division of Responsibility in Investment and Interest in 

Income 

The Partnership Lease. — As a result of his studies, Dr. E. V. Wilcox^*^ 
believes the fairest contract to be one into which all equipment, including 
tools, machinery, work stock, productive stock, and other working capital, 
is owned in equal partnership; all expenses, including hired labor and 
taxes, are shared equally; and the proceeds are divided half-and-half. 
All products taken for family use by either landlord or tenant are charged 
against the respective parties. 

Such a contract provides a basis for the fair and equal sharing of 
all crops which may be grown on a farm, however unlike the amounts of 
labor required for their production; for if all expense for extra and hired 
labor is shared equally, it is obviously just that the proceeds from crops 
requiring extra labor should be shared on the same basis as those which 



592 FARM MANAGEMENT 

require little labor. Moreover, the unfairness of requiring the tenant 
to deliver crops to distant markets is obviated by sharing the expense of 
the labor thus involved. 

Again, this plan is readily adaptable to cases in which the tenant 
and landlord furnish working capital in unequal shares. In such cases it 
is merely necessary to take out of the undivided farm income the interest 
on each one's share of the working capital, and also the operating expenses, 
after which the remainder is divided half-and-half. Many leases con- 
structed on this plan are in operation. 

Example of How a Partnership Lease Works. 

Table 245. — Analysis of the Business of a $25,000 Farm Leased under the 

Half-and-Half System 
Receipts: 
Crops: 

65 acres corn 

Tenant Owner Farm 

1,500 bu. sold $375 $375 

800 bu. fed. 

35 acres wheat, 1,000 bu. sold 500 500 

15 acres oats 

300 bu. sold 60 60 

300 bu. fed. 
20 acres hay 

5 tons sold 25 25 

20 tons fed. 

135 acres crops 

20 acres rotation pasture. 
5 acres waste. 
Stock: 

12 cows, cattle, milk, etc 350 350 

6 horses or mules 35 35 

Swine 250 250 

Poultry and eggs 5 5 



Total $1 ,600 $1 ,600 $3,200 

Expenses: 

Hired labor and board $200 $200 

Family labor 25 25 

Cash expense of operation and repair 300 300 

Depreciation of equipment, 14 per cent of $500 35 35 

Depreciation of buildings, 6 per cent of $2,000 60 60 

Interest on working capital, 6 per cent of $2,500 75 75 

Taxes on real estate and equipment 80 80 



Total $775 $775 $1,550 



Farm income $1 ,650 

Reward for tenant's management and labor 825 

Reward for use of real estate 825 

Interest on real estate (per cent) 3.3 



FARM LEASE FORMS 593 

The tenant receives S825, half of the net profit, as a reward of his 
labor and management, also an allowance for half of the value of the 
family labor, and board of hired labor furnished, and the interest on 
his half of the working capital. His working capital is maintained at 
the same value at which he turned it into the partnership, or at which it 
is replaced. 

The landowner receives, in addition to his S825, an allowance of the 
interest on his half of the working capital, as well as having all taxes 
paid on his real estate and an allowance for depreciation. 

Interest on working capital in the above example is charged at 6 
per cent. The rate would be about 10 per cent if it included depreciation 
charges. 

The Empirical Method. — Under some conditions the empirical method 
of prorating incomes has its advantages. By this method each item 
furnished by each party to the lease is given a fair valuation and the 
gross income then divided in accordance with the relative proportion 
that each party has invested. 

In general, the safest and fairest basis of what constitutes the proper 
disbursement of farm receipts as between lessor and lessee is to repay each 
partner according to the share put into the business. The owner usu- 
ally offers land, possibly buildings or other improvements, sometimes 
live stock, and occasionally feed. The tenant as a rule supplies labor, 
sometimes working equipment and operating capital. 

Each is entitled to a reasonable rate of interest to the extent of his 
capital, to a sum for depreciation (reasonable wear and tear), and to 
replacement of any items the use of which exhaust capital, as seed, 
sacks, fertilizer and the like, and to reimbursement for labor. 

Thus, an estimate of these items indicates the extent of each one's 
interest and gives a guide as to the ratio in each should share in the 
receipts. 

In figuring out a given scheme care should be exercised that only 
correct data be used, and that due allowance be made for over-capitaliza- 
tion of land, labor, and all items necessary to the proper planning of 
the scheme. 

In determining the proper division of profits or losses in cases of 
leased land, a clearer understanding of what each party is rightly entitled 
to will result if the various items entering into the deal are tabulated 
at correct figures, based upon careful estimates of forthcoming expense, 
or just valuation of present investments. The interest of each partner 
can then be determined therefrom. 

Rights of Each Party to a Lease under the Empirical Method. — Each 
party is rightly entitled to — 

(a) Repayment of all labor — manual and supervisory. 

(6) Repayment of all moneys paid out for operating expenses, — sacks, 
twine, seed, fertilizer, marketing, etc. 

38 



594 FARM MANAGEMENT 

(c) Interest on all moneys invested in land, improvements, stock, 
implements, based upon fair valuations and the going rate of interest. 

{d) Interest on all moneys advanced for operating expense, — feed, 
material, labor, harvest, and the like. 

(e) A sum to offset depreciation of the plant, — buildings, implements, 
stock, and the like. 

(/) A sum to be set aside as a sinking fund for use in times of unusual 
needs. 

It is true that some difficulty may arise in ascribing rates to some of 
the factors, as, for instance, a determination of what the land is really 
worth, or the right rate to allow for the tenant's labor and supervision. 
Failure to meet squarely such issues at the beginning of a lease is more 
than liable to mean an unsuccessful ultimate outcome. A better under- 
standing of the various elements involved will prove of educational 
value to both tenant and owner, and eventually will assist in readjusting 
leasing conditions more in accordance with practices to preserve soil 
fertility and to keep up the farm in good condition, items for which no 
owner can expect a tenant to pay, and which, if they are to be done, 
should be clearly provided for in drawing up of the lease. 

Example of Determining the Rights of Each Party to a Lease by the Empirical 
Method. — There is available a 40-acre farm having a 10-cow dairy, 10 brood sows, 
35 acres of alfalfa, and full equipment to carry on the business. The farm is to be 
leased under terms as follows: 

The owner agrees to furnish 40 acres of land worth $9,020, buildings ($1,270), 
fences ($347), 35 acres of good alfalfa, 10 cows, 1 bull, 10 brood sows, 1 boar, $530 
worth of farm implements, and $328 of miscellaneous equipment necessary to the 
carrying on of the business. 

The tenant to supply work stock, labor, all purchased feed, seed, and operating 
expenses. 

Owner will pay taxes ($125) and insurance ($15). 

Proper division of income is sought. 
Items involved: 
From owner: 

Land — 35 acres good alfalfa 1 $9 , 020 

5 acres farmstead J 

Buildings 1 , 270 

Fences 347 

Cows (10) 850 

Bull 100 

Sows (10) 200 

Boar 30 

Implements 530 

Miscellaneous equipment 328 

Taxes 125 

Insurance 15 

From tenant: 

Work stock 300 

Labor 108 



FARM LEASE FORMS 595 

Feed — horses 12 

Dairy 180 

Hogs 474 

Seed 21 

Water 80 

Other material 10 

Rent, silo cutter 6 

Contract work 142 

Management 720 

Office expenses 50 

Incidentals 50 

Assume basis figures are satisfactory and each is entitled to: 

(a) Return of money spent outright, (b) 6 per cent interest on investment, (c) 
depreciation. 

We should have: 

1. For owner. 

Outlay — taxes and insurance $140.00 

Interest investment = $12,675 at 6 per cent 760. 50 

Depreciation : 

5 per cent on buildings and fences 88 . 00 

6 per cent on cows and bull 67 . 00 

17 per cent on sows and boar 39 . 00 

10 per cent on implements 53 . 00 

25 per cent on $116 special equipment 11 .00 

10 per cent on $105 special equipment 29.00 

10 per cent on tools 11 . 00 

Total interest of owner in output $1 , 188 . 50 

2. For tenant. 
Outlay : 

Labor $108.00 

Feed 666 . 00 

Seed 21.00 

Water 80 . 00 

Material 10.00 

Rent silo cutter 6 . 00 

Contract work 142 . 00 

Tenant's time 720 . 00 

Office expenses 50 . 00 

Incidentals 50 . 00 

$1,853.00 
Interest on investment — $1,000 (estimated) operating 

capital at 4 per cent 40 . 00 

6 per cent on horses— $300 18 . 00 

Depreciation of horses at 12 per cent 36 . 00 



Total interest of tenant in output $1 , 967 . 00 

Combined interest, $3,128.95 
Percentage interest of each in income 

Owner, 38 per cent. 

Tenant, 62 per cent. 



596 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Advocates of the Empirical Method. — Benton believes^** that: 

"The proper basis for a fair and equitable share lease is that each party share in 
the products of the farm in the proportion that he shares in the cost of production. 
He then shows by tabulated data the shares which landlord and tenant should bear 
in the cost of producing wheat, oats, barley, hay, and corn. He goes on to say: 

"The proper division of expenses under a lease including live stock is, however, 
more difficult to secure. Under a half-share lease where the landlord furnishes all the 
dairy cows, he contributes less than one-half the cost of maintenance. 

The relative amounts contributed by landlord and tenant to the cost of raising 
beef cattle, hogs, and sheep on a half-share basis cannot be easily calculated, but the 
furnishing of pasture by the landlord is considered but an offset to the labor furnished 
by the tenant. The landlord frequently feels he is contributing further by furnishing 
better housing facilities, which tend to increase his share of the cost." 

In writing concerning the amount of rent and time, and method of 
paying, Gray and Turner point out^^^ that: 

Great care should be used in defining carefully the method of dividing the products 
of the farm. It should be clearly indicated whether the division is to be made before 
certain expenses are deducted or after such deduction. This is especially important 
in the case of those share leases which are approximately economic partnerships. 
It should also be carefully stated what use of undivided products may be made by 
each party. Often, for instance, the tenant is allowed for family use milk, eggs, and 
other products, out of the joint product of the farm. In some instances, also, the 
landlord receives certain things for family use out of the undivided product. However, 
if it is desired to make an accurate and careful division, it is necessary to take account 
of all these minor items, and in this case the tenant or the landlord should be charged 
for all jointly owned products used by him. In any case, the lease should make clear 
the rights of the respective parties in regard to these matters. 

It is also frequently customary to allow the tenant to feed work stock from un- 
divided grain or hay, and sometimes to feed a few hogs in like manner. Very com- 
monly the tenant is allowed to feed poultry out of the undivided grain. If these 
privileges are to be allowed, however, the contract should provide definitely the 
maximum number of each kind of stock that the tenant may keep in this manner. 
A more accurate method is either to require each party to feed all private stock out of 
his share or to charge him for all feed used out of undivided property. 

When the share lease applies only to crops, and not to live stock, it is frequently 
customary to charge the tenant cash rent for the use of pasture, since the landlord 
receives no benefit from this use. Sometimes a small amount of pasture may be 
allowed free as a special inducement to the tenant, or it may be balanced by some 
special advantage to the landlord in the division of the crops. However, when the 
lease applies both to stock and crops, both parties benefit from the use of the pasture 
and no arrangement for pasture rent is necessary. 

The landlord and tenant jointly make contributions to the business of production. 
Each should receive for his contributions what they are worth. If the total product 
of the farm, year after year, is not enough to pay the value of these contributions, the 
business must be regarded as unprofitable. As a matter of fact, however, the annual 
value of land may be considered a surplus above the other expenses of production. 
If some permanent change occurs to reduce the total average value of the product, 
in the long run the rental value of the land must fall because less will remain after 
paying the cost of the other factors of production. On the other hand, if a permanent 
change occurs to increase the average value of the product without increasing in the 
same proportion the other expenses, there will be a larger remainder that may be 
obtained by the landowner as rent. 



FARM LEASE FORMS 597 

This complexity in the relationship of landlord and tenant makes it difficult to 
determine the fair division of the product, especially when there is no system of 
accounting by which the relative values of the respective contributions of the two 
parties may be measured. The result has been that the actual systems of share 
leasing which have become customary in different parts of the country and in different 
types of farming are largely the product of a rough process of experiment. Different 
items are used to balance one another in a sort of rough and ready manner without 
the employment of any underlying and permanent principle of division. There is 
such a bewildering variety of privileges and obligations of uncertain money value 
that it may be practically impossible, even with a careful system of accounting, to 
determine the actual net shares of the respective parties. Such items as the twine 
bill, the thrashing bill, the furnishing of grass seed and horse feed, the fertilizer 
bills, hauling crops to market, and the use of pastures, are juggled back and forth in 
various combinations. The confusion is made greater by the yearly variation in the 
actual and relative value of the various factors of cost and by changes in crop acreages 
and farm practice. 

It is important that this rough and ready method of adjustment, which was not 
seriously inaccurate in the pioneer days of our agriculture when the relative values 
involved were not nearly so large as at the present time and when fewer of our farmers 
were tenants, should give way to a simpler and more accurate method of bargaining 
under which it would be possible in advance for each party to balance with some 
degree of accuracy his prospective expenses and receipts. In formulating such a 
contract, it is necessary to classify the contributions of the respective parties. We 
may recognize the following main groups: 

(a) The use of real estate and expenses on account of real estate, including taxes, 
insurance on buildings, and repairs. 

(5) Ordinary farm labor. 

(c) Work stock. 

{d) Special skilled labor hired on special occasions. 

(e) Farm implements and operating equipment. 

(/) Animals other than work animals. 

{g) Miscellaneous expenses. 

The landlord, of course, provides the real estate, and generally pays the expenses 
on account of real estate. However, it is frequently customary for the tenant to 
furnish the unskilled labor necessary for making repairs on buildings and fences, and 
in the case of long leases he may even furnish the unskilled labor for making some 
improvements. 

If the use of the real estate is a factor which the landlord is best in a position to 
contribute, the labor needed to work the farm can best be contributed by the tenant. 
Other factors of production may be owned by one or the other of the parties and a 
practicable plan of leasing worked out, but seldom is a rented farm to be found on which 
the landlord furnishes any large share of the labor used to operate it. On the ordinary 
family-sized farm, the tenant who is a capable worker may need to hire practically 
no labor, especially if his children are old enough to help. If labor must be hired to 
assist in working the farm, the tenant should pay for it, as he is in the better position 
to control its cost and to get the most work for the money spent. His share of the 
returns should be so large that he will be amply rewarded for his willingness to do all 
he possibly can himself and for his ability to use labor effectively. 

In regard to the work animals and equipment, there is more diversity of practice 
than there is in the furnishing of land or labor. In some parts of the country, espe- 
cially in the south, the very poor tenants may furnish only the labor, while the land- 
lord furnishes land, buildings, work animals, and equipment. On other southern 
farms, and usually in the north, the tenant farmer furnishes the labor to work the 



598 FARM MANAGEMENT 

farm as well as the work animals and equipment. The one who furnishes the work 
animals and equipment usually contributes the feed, upkeep, and replacement costs 
associated with use of these factors of production. However, on stock share farms, 
the tenant, although contributing the work animals and equipment, generally has the 
right to feed these animals from the undivided feed and supplies, and not uncommonly 
the landlord owns part or full interest in some of the equipment or in some of the 
horses. 

The simplest kind of share contract would be one in which all expenses, including 
the value of the use of land, were shared in some definite proportion, as half-and-half, 
and all receipts were shared in the same proportion. This would be in the fullest 
sense an economic partnership. Since, however, it is customary and largely desirable 
that the landlord shall invariably furnish the use of real estate while the tenant shall 
furnish the farm labor and also usually the work stock and equipment, it is possible 
to make a simple and accurate adjustment as follows: First an estimate should be 
made of the fair value of the use of the land and of the value of ordinary farm labor, 
with additional estimates of the cost of horse labor and the annual cost of the use of 
the equipment. The value of each of these items may be determined with a fair 
degree of accuracy in advance. The ratio of the two values should be determined, 
and all other expenses and receipts should be borne in the same proportion. 

It may be objected that this arrangement will not conform to the convenience of 
the two parties with respect to contributing to expenses. Thus the tenant may not 
have sufficient funds to bear the share of expenses allotted to him, or it may not be 
convenient for the landlord to furnish his designated share of expenses. It is clear, 
however, that the total expenses must be borne by one or both of the two parties in 
some proportion. Whichever party is lacking in the necessary funds to defray his 
share of the expense should borrow the necessary amount from the other party or from 
some other source of credit, paying interest on the loan until the end of the crop year, 
when the net receipts are divided and the loan may be repaid. 

This method of simplifying the rental contract conforms in part to customary 
practice. In most parts of the country, a customary share has developed which is 
supposed to represent roughly the proportionate value of the invariable contributions 
of the respective parties. For instance, in the cotton belt it is customary for the 
tenant when furnishing work stock to pay the landlord one-fourth of the cotton and 
one-third of the grain. In the newer wheat regions, it is generally customary for the 
tenant to furnish work stock and implements and pay one-third of the grain. Where 
land is more valuable, the tenant will pay one-half of the grain. These customary 
shares, however, do not take into account the variation in value between individual 
farms, and consequently other items of expense such as the twine bill, the threshing 
bill, the fertilizer bill, the furnishing of the seed grain, and the amount of rent for 
special privileges payable in cash are employed as balances, resulting in an unduly 
complicated contract. 

Hubbard and Black^^" offer two compromise plans: 

1. Follow the custom so far as possible, and when not possible make allowances 
for it in some other part of the lease. For example, if free fire wood for the tenant is 
the custom, and the farm has no fire wood, the tenant can be given all the poultry, 
or a larger share of the poultry receipts. If a farm is too poor to rent well, the tenant 
can be given other advantages. Differences of this sort can, if necessary, be settled 
in actual cash at the end of the lease. 

2. Count the tenant's labor and management, family labor and hired labor, and 
interest, taxes, depreciation and upkeep on his equipment, as equal to the landlord's 
management, interest, taxes, upkeep, and depreciation on real estate and equipment. 



FARM LEASE FORMS 599 

Divide the other expenses half-and-half, by estimating their amounts in advance, 
or by settlement afterward. 

The great merit of any plan which would divide income on the basis of expenses, 
or expenses on the basis of income, would be that it would give the tenant the full 
benefit of all the extra labor he hired. 

Objection to the Empirical Method. — Wilcox's objection to the empir- 
ical method is that lease contracts -in which various items of expense and 
privilege are empirically adjusted and assigned to tenant or landlord are 
never, except by mere accident, strictly fair, but are always slightly in 
favor of either landlord or tenant. Any injustice of this sort may become 
a source of friction between landlord and tenant and may lead to more 
frequent moving on the part of the latter. Usually, however, the 
approximate value of all these items is generally known. Shrewd 
judgment and local experience enable the landowner and tenant to esti- 
mate closely what the thrashing, twine, feed, seed, and fertilizer bills 
will be. 

Points to Observe in Taking a Diversified Enterprise. — In considering 
the lease of a diversified enterprise one may well examine the past, present, 
and prospective profits and expenditures, and capital needs, to see what 
can be done to improve quantity or quality of product, save expense, and 
cut down present operating expenses. 

For instance, a certain run-down orchard may be improved by green 
manures and mineral fertilizers, proper pruning, spraying, and thinning 
of fruit; a dairy may contain several boarder cows which can be weeded 
out; an alfalfa farm, now yielding 3 tons of hay per acre, can, under irriga- 
tion, be made to produce 6 tons; a tract of run-out land can be im- 
proved bj'' rotation with beans, cultivated crop, and summer fallow, to a 
point where it becomes economically well worth while ; grain land if alter- 
nated with pasturing and improved by deeper plowing may have unde- 
veloped profit-making possibilities. 

Estimating Rental Rates for Farm Fully Equipped. — In determining 
the amount of rental to be paid for an established ranch where a full 
equipment of land, buildings, pumping plant, work stock, poultry, cows, 
pigs, and other live stock, and implements, is available the owner is 
entitled to interest on his money and a sum sufficient to offset deprecia- 
tion. The proper rental rate may be reached by taking each main item 
and working out its value and rate of depreciation. 

Another way to determine the amount one can afford to pay as rental 
where a mixed equipment is offered, such as mixed orchards, land variable 
in soil types, or where live stock is combined with crop production, is to 
figure about what sum the tenant would be entitled to as manager, if on a 
salary and running the farm as ordinarily handled by a manager who 
secures average yields and prices. Figure out gross profits of the ranch 
under such conditions, and a fair basis of rental can be determined. Addi- 



600 FARM MANAGEMENT 

tional income to be derived from work as a renter instead of a manager is 
to be sought in securing one or more of the following: 

(a) Greater productivity. 

(b) Better utilization of products, or by-products (as use of animals to convert 
feed). 

(c) Better selling price. 

(d) Reduction of operating expenses (as elimination of waste effort; better organ- 
izing of work, etc.). 

The study of opportunities offers ample reward in increased profit, 
because (a) if the ranch is on a poor paying basis, the original rental 
rate will be low and there will be a good chance to improve it ; while if (b) 
it is, on the other hand, a specially well paying proposition and well 
planned and organized, the tenant may allow a substantial sum to offset 
the manager's salary which can be commanded on such a proposition. 



CHAPTER XXV 
FARM LAW 

No one expects the farm manager to be a lawyer, or even to be able 
to answer a large number of legal questions. An understanding of the 
law's scope, however, and of its method of working, along with some 
actual knowledge of the law as it affects his farming and business opera- 
tions, should be considered an essential part of his equipment. 

Nevertheless, when a need for detailed counsel arises in the daily 
work, it is usually necessary, and better, to consult a good lawyer. Such 
procedure in the long run is cheaper and more satisfactory than to attempt 
to handle a case solely by one's self. 

What Law Is. — Green, in his text book on farm law,^^^ points out that 
the principles upon which all laws are founded are those of common 
sense. It is this truth which justifies the rule that ignorance of the law 
excuses ruo one, since it is in the power of every man by means of ordinary 
intelligent attention to the conduct of others to ascertain what are his 
own duties, and every sane man is able to conform his own conduct to 
the laws deducible from human habit. From the standpoint of use, 
laws may be considered as a body of rules to regulate and govern human 
conduct which are recognized and applied in a civilized state by courts 
of justice in deciding controversies among men. These laws fall into 
two groups, known as written and unwritten, or else as statutory and 
common. 

Written Law. — Written law is broadly designated as statute law and is 
embodied in constitutions. Federal and State, in enactments of Congress 
and state legislatures, and in the by-laws and ordinances of municipal 
corporations and other local governmental bodies. 

Unwritten Law. — Unwritten law comprises the bulk of our law. 
Unwritten law is composed of unwritten precepts and rules recognized 
and enforced by judicial tribunals irrespective of any legislative sanction. 
It is the outgrowth of established usage and long accepted and continued 
custom. This common law affords a guide in determining the merits of 
a controversy between individuals when there is no legislation pertinent 
to the subject. It is based on common sense and is, in short, the embodi- 
ment of broad and comprehensive principles inspired by natural reason 
and an innate sense of justice, and adopted by common consent to regulate 
and govern human affairs. 

Farm Law. — Farm law is the portion of legal regulations, common or 
statute, co.ncerned with the farmer and his possessions. 

601 



602 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Classification of Farm Law. — The body of written and unwritten law 
may be further reclassified as being either (a) definitive, (6) restrictive, 
or (c) constructive. 

Examples of definitive legislation are afforded by laws defining water rights, 
boundary lines, rights of way, grading of products, etc. Examples of restrictive 
legislation are such statutes as those prohibiting the keeping of cows or poultry near 
neighbors' dwelling, the pasturing of stock on right of way, the polluting of streams, 
the poisoning of cattle, the stealing of fruit; those requiring the fencing of stock; 
those regulating an individual's actions as to trespass. Examples of constructive 
regulation are to be found in legislation providing for state controlled land settlement, 
for financing of farmers' activities, for establishing the bases of mutual irrigation or 
drainage districts, for investigating, experimenting in, and teaching agricultural sciences 
and practices, the latter including the Federal Smith-Lever Act creating the County 
Agent movement. 

For purposes of convenience an inquiry into farm law as it affects a 
farmer's interests may be best conducted under some such grouping as 

1. International regulations. 

2. Federal regulations. 

3. State regulations. 

4. County regulations. 

5. Municipal regulations. 

Field so Extensive Necessary to Limit Discussion. — Because of the 
vast amount of legislation written upon the legal books of the country, 
some limiting of the field is necessary in this book. 

Legislation — federal, state or community — is far-reaching, although 
local needs and conditions tend to emphasize different phases in different 
areas. A survey of the statute books shows a great range of laws covering 
such subjects as tenure of land, passing of title of ownership from one to 
another, mortgaging of property, legal rate of interest, weed eradication, 
control of infectious diseases, inspection of imported fruits, plants, and 
seeds for presence of injurious insects or diseases, regulation of common 
carriers, standard packages, protection of workers, housing of farm help, 
payment of wages, insurance of farm labor, abuse of animals, protection 
of crops from roving stock, impounding of stray animals, killing of wolves, 
coyotes, prairie dogs, ground squirrels and similar pests, shooting of 
game doing damage to crops, protection of insectivorous birds, contract- 
ing debts, etc., through a wide range. 

Our Attention Confined to Regulative Legislation. — In this discussion, 
constructive and definitive legislation gives place to regulative, as of all 
three classes the restrictions placed upon the operator are likely to be 
of greatest personal interest, use, and value. 

Because of the limitations of space which can be given over to the 
subject of law, little can be done beyond calling attention to the general 
field and pointing out the need of supplementing by individual study 



FARM LAW 603 

what is given here. Such study can be started by procuring from the 
. Secretary of State available copies of recent state legislation and by con- 
sulting local records of federal and municipal statutes. 

Individual interest will usually rule in determining what phases 
are to be inquired into. Thus the man interested in dairying will find 
his best line of inquiry to be the laws governing the handling of dairies 
and dairy products. Municipal regulation is rather to the front where 
dairymen are concerned, because of the importance of raw milk as a food. 
The dairyman should therefore post himself on the regulations governing 
the keeping of diseased cows, the handling of manure, the separating of 
milking strings from horses, hogs, and sources of contamination, and the 
grading of milk; and should be up on housing requirements, inspection 
requirements, milk house regulations, and so on. The fruit man will find 
his interest lies in measures aiming to prevent introduction of serious 
pests, in standard package laws, in legal guarantee of content of commer- 
cial spray material, in transportation regulations. The stock man will 
center on laws governing the eradication of ticks or scab or poisonous 
weeds. The horseman will post himself on the laws requiring the regis- 
tration of stallions, the control of glanders, etc. 

Conceptions of the Law^^^ 

Throughout the United States there are certain generally recognized 
and accepted points of view which together form the groundwork of the 
legal structure. The following paragraphs are indicative. 

Legal Definition of a Farmer. — If a man devotes himself wholly or 
chiefly to the tillage of the soil, he is in law a farmer, though he may call 
himself a horticulturist, a viticulturist, a gardener, or the like. A farmer 
is a cultivator of a considerable tract of land in some one or more of the 
customary and recognized ways of farming. It is not indispensable 
that he should till the ground in person, or that his operations should be 
limited to planting, sowing, and cultivating the soil. A farmer may 
cultivate all or only part of his land. He may grow wheat, corn, or 
other crops, he may breed, feed, and rear stock in connection therewith, 
whether he sows and reaps with his own hands or those of a tenant, 
a cropper, or a hired laborer. And yet the owner of a farm who simply 
makes it his legal residence and is much away from home, while all the 
farming is done by others, is not a farmer. But if he Hves on his farm 
and makes farming his chief occupation, he is classed as a farmer before 
the law, although he is partly engaged with other occupations. 

A farmer, when farming is his chief occupation, by the provisions of 
the National Bankruptcy Law, cannot be forced against this will into 
bankruptcy. This provision, together with application of tax and license 
laws and municipal regulations for farmers (as a peddler's license for 



604 FARM MANAGEMENT 

selling produce) makes it necessary to have a clear understanding as to 
what constitutes a farmer. 

Legal Definition of a Farm. — Legally, a farm generally means an area 
of land under single ownership and devoted to agriculture — either to 
raising crops or for pasturage. It may consist of any number of acres, 
of one field or many fields, and it may be wholly in one township or 
county or in more than one with no necessary relation to political sub- 
divisions. A farm is not necessarily enclosed land; a farm extends over 
earth surface fit for cultivation, and is circumscribed by its metes and 
bounds. Laterally, it extends to its boundary lines, and when one of 
these is a highway or an unnavigable stream, unless the deed has pro- 
vided otherwise, and generally where the common law prevails, the farm 
extends to the middle of the road and to the thread of the stream. If 
the farm is on the seashore or is bordered by navigable waters in which 
the tides ebb and flow, it stops at the water's edge — high water mark, 
that is, where the common law prevails. The rule applies also to large 
rivers and great lakes. A farm, in the eye of the law extends from the 
center of the earth indefinitely above. 

The term "land" is meant to embrace the surface of the earth and 
everything annexed to it — trees, grass, water, buildings, and fences. 
Gravel and sand in their native beds are real estate. Crops while they 
remain rooted in the ground, whether wild or cultivated, shrubs^ trees, 
forests, and other plants, are all part of the soil. Any minerals lying 
underneath the farm, petroleum, natural gas, coal, or iron, belong to 
the owner and constitute a part of his land. Structures — dwellings, 
stables, barns, styled fixtures, are usually insisted upon as a part of 
the land. 

Boundaries. — It is the rule of the common law attaching to the owner- 
ship of land, wherever man's private ownership in real property is admitted, 
that everyone's domain is enclosed by a boundary either visible or invis- 
ible — a material hedge, fence or wall or an ideal and unseen barrier. 
In locating lands described in a deed, it is a general rule that natural 
objects called for, such as mountains, lakes, rivers, rocks, etc., control 
artificial objects such as marked lines, stakes, blazed trees, stone piles, 
etc. ; that these in turn control courses, courses control distances, and that, 
finally, both courses and distances control quantities. 

To be inclosed, land must be shut in on all sides; thus it is inclosed 
when entirely surrounded by a fence. If stock break through or p'ass 
over a fence, the test is at the place where the break takes place, and the 
fact that it was not high enough at another place is of no consequence 
if it was all right at the place where the animals crossed it. 

A division fence is a fence which separates contiguous lands of adjoin- 
ing owners. The owners of adjoining lands divided by a fence which 
they mistakenly suppose to be upon the true line between them, who 



FARM LAW 605 

claim title only up to the true division line wherever it may be, must 
conform to the true line when it is discovered and traced. All that a 
land owner is called upon to do regarding the keeping up of a common 
division line fence is to be as careful as prudent men generally are. 

Trees standing on a boundary line belong to the respective owners of 
both sides as tenants in common, and it is generally held that neither 
owner has a right to lop off limbs and roots on his side close to the trunk 
without the consent of the other. A tree growing several feet from the 
boundary belongs to the owner upon whose land it is growing, and the 
neighbor does not own the fruit or the branches which overhang his land ; 
he has no right to gather the fruit, but if the branches are a nuisance he 
may lop them off, especially after giving notice of his purpose to the owner 
of the tree. The overhanging limbs must in some sensible and practical 
way damage him by lessening his use or enjoyment of the underlying 
land. 

In considering boundaries on non-navigable streams, the boundary 
runs to the thread (or channel) of the stream. Any islands lying in 
the stream will be included with the land in the stream between the 
channel and the bank. No matter on which side an accretion forms, the 
boundary will still remain in the middle of the channel. 

Waters of the Farm. — The waters of the farm comprise all bodies 
of water great and small lying within the boundary lines of the farm, 
all streams flowing across it, every arm or inlet of sea and fresh water 
lake, every river and creek up to the middle or thread which constitutes 
the farm boundary. It includes all surface waters due to rains and snows; 
and all subsurface and percolating waters that feed the farm's wells, 
springs, and pools. 

Land under the sea and the great navigable lakes and rivers belongs, 
in general, to the sovereign. 

A water course is a channel or canal for conveying water, and it 
may be artificial or natural, provided it has a bed, a distinct channel, 
and defined banks. Mere gullies of running water fed by occasional rains 
or melting snows are not water courses. 

Navigable streams are public, and are common highways which must 
not be obstructed, although if a man owns both sides of one such he has 
been considered as having the right to put a fence across it. Just what 
constitutes a navigable stream has not been entirely agreed upon by the 
courts. The U. S. Supreme Court has said that any sort of vessel that 
can float upon water, whether driven by steam, wind, or muscular power, 
may be an instrument of commerce and transportation, and if so used it 
makes the stream on which it plies navigable. Streams are generally 
considered navigable if they afford passage for boats and barges up and 
down for a goodly portion of the year, even though there may be times 
when they are too shallow to permit passage. A river not navigable in 



606 FARM MANAGEMENT 

its natural state cannot be converted into a navigable stream without 
compensation made to the riparian proprietors. 

A stream not large enough and deep enough to be navigable in the 
technical sense, but which is of sufficient volume to float rafts or logs to 
market is termed a "floatable" stream, and if almost always deep enough 
or strong enough to float down logs it is a public stream and called 
navigable. 

Riparian. — The word "riparian" is derived from the Latin word 
" ripa " which means the shore of a river. Strictly speaking, when applied 
to a landowner, it refers to the proprietor of the bank of an unnavigable 
stream, but, in actual practice, the word is used with reference to lands 
which have water flowing over or bordering them. The authorities 
generally limit the extent of the riparian land to the water shed of the 
stream and hold that upland beyond, although a part of a single tract 
under one ownership with the bank of the stream, cannot be riparian, 
although this is not the case in some states. 

Water is the common and equal property of every one through whose 
land it flows, and the right of each landowner to use and consume it with- 
out destroying or unreasonably impairing the rights of others is the same. 
An owner of land bordering on a running stream has a right to have its 
waters flow, naturally, and none can lawfully divert them without his con- 
sent. If a landowner uses the water of a stream in a reasonable and law- 
ful way, without malice or negligence, and an injury results to his neighbor 
below, he is not answerable for damages. He may thus give his cattle 
access to the water, or bathe in the stream, even if the water is used below 
for municipal purposes. 

But a riparian proprietor will not be allowed to pollute the stream on 
which his land borders by casting into it waste, chemicals, or foreign 
noxious and offensive matter from mills, mines, or factories to the damage 
of a lower owner, and a lower owner is entitled to an injunction against 
an upper one who persists in polluting the stream. 

Surface waters are ordinarily defined as waters originating in falling 
rains, melting snows, or overflows of streams in times of freshets. They 
are waters that lie upon, overspread, or percolate the soil, and flow in 
no particular direction. Every owner of land has a natural easement to 
have the surface water upon his land turned from his land to his neighbors, 
and the neighbor has no remedy except to pass it on, and nobody is 
subject to an action for deflecting surface water from his own to lower 
lands, unless he is negligent or vindictive. This right, however, does not 
authorize the gathering of surface water in basins and discharging it 
as floods by artificial means. And, furthermore, if there are natural 
drains, as sloughs, ravines, or water courses, the surface water must 
be sent through these. 



FARM LAW 607 

Underground Waters. — Water naturally percolating through the soil 
is a part of that soil, and percolating subsurface water which does not 
flow in a natural channel as a defined stream may be intercepted and 
diverted by a landowner under whose land it is found. A landowner 
has an unrestricted right to dig a well upon his own land for his own use, 
and he is not liable for damages if by so doing he drains away underground 
water from his neighbor; he is also entitled to make a reasonable use of 
a stream flowing beneath the surface of his land even though it supplies 
his neighbor's well, but he has no right to make merchandise of the water 
drawn from his well, if by so doing he deprive his neighbor's well of its 
supply. 

Subterranean streams flowing in a defined channel are amenable to 
the same regulation as to diversion and pollution as surface streams. 

Kinds of Title to Farm Lands. — The title to land is secured in three 
ways: 1st, by a grant from a previous owner; 2nd, by operation of law; 
3rd, by the addition to land already owned of more land through the 
working of the forces of nature. 

In the first case, the grant may take one of several forms. It may 
be a patent from the sovereign, or a deed of bargain and sale, gift, or 
quit claim from a living owner, or a devise by the last will and testament 
of one who died with land in his possession. 

In the case of title by operation of law, the first is by descent to the 
heir of an owner who died intestate, the second through possession for a 
period of time prescribed by the local statute of limitations. 

One who owns land upon the seashore, the margin of a lake, or 
the bank of a stream may acquire more land through the action of the 
waters in building up accretions, or in retreating and uncovering land 
hitherto submerged. 

Title by Grant. — The best title to land is one showing a regular, legal 
chain of conveyance of the soil to the possessor from the sovereign. 
This then gives the reason for properly investigating title to land before 
purchasing, otherwise if there is not presumptive proof that the chain 
is complete an adverse claim may be established which will tend to destroy 
the validity of title if not actually to result in disposessing the present 
owner. 

Definition of a Deed. — A deed is a written instrument which transfers 
an interest in real estate from one owner to another. The execution of a 
deed consists in the signing and sealing (when seals are required) of the 
deed by the grantor and the delivery to the grantee; it is the consumma- 
tion of the contract to convey, the effectual completion of the conveyance. 

A deed takes effect only from the time it is delivered, and it therefore 
does not become operative until it is accepted by the grantee, for his 
acceptance is necessary to complete the delivery. No particular form 
or ceremony is requisite to effect the delivery of a deed; any words or 



608 FARM MANAGEMENT 

conduct manifesting an unconditional giving of it up are enough. The 
possession of a deed by the grantee is proof of its dehvery, and this is 
further emphasized by the recording of a deed, or leaving it with the 
proper officer to be recorded, thus implying that the deed was delivered. 

Delivery in Escrow. — A deed delivered in escrow means that the deed, 
duly executed, is delivered to a third person to be delivered to the grantee 
later upon the performance of some condition or the happening of some 
contingency, and it does not pass title until it is delivered to the grantee 
upon fulfillment of the specified terms. 

Transfer of Land by Will. — Title of land passes from one living indi- 
vidual to another only by a deed, but a will is just as effective as a deed to 
pass title to land, only title does not pass until the death of the testator 
He may revoke the device anytime before he dies — "device" being the 
proper word to denote the gift of real estate by will, while "descend" 
denotes the transmission of real estate by inheritance to a successor of the 
owner dying without leaving a will. In the case of devise, the title is 
similar to that given by a deed ; whereas title by descent is a title vested 
by operation of law. 

Title by Prescription. — Title by prescription is a right acquired by a 
person by possession of land during the time fixed by statute, even 
though entered upon at first without right. Nowadays, the statute 
of limitations is regarded as enough in itself to found a title by prescrip- 
tion, and though formerly regarded as harsh it is now considered benefi- 
cial because it tends to end disputes and prevent litigation. The object 
of the statute of limitations is to quiet title to possession, and its effect 
is to shut out all inquiry into the true title and to award a title to him 
who has had possession of the land for the length of time required by 
the statute. Such a title is a complete legal one conferred by law instead 
of being a contract for succession of ownership which could be put in 
writing and recorded. It is marketable. 

Title by Accession. — Title by accession may be acquired by accretion 
and reliction. Accretion is the addition made to riparian lands (lands 
bordering on water) by the gradual deposit of sedimentary soil upon the 
shore or bank, the chief characteristic being that the increase must be of 
imperceptible growth. Land thus formed is termed alluvion or alluvial 
land, and attaches only to riparian ownership, being incapable of separate 
existence. Reliction is the term applied to land added to shore line or 
bank by the slow and imperceptible permanent retreat of overlying 
waters — ocean, lake or river, which, retreating, uncover land that their 
waters formerly overflowed. Land which is occasionally and temporarily 
made bare by the retreat of the waters of a lake or stream only to be 
covered again is not added to adjoining land by reliction. The owner 
of land bordered by waters acquires no title to land uncovered or built 
up artificially by human action, by filling in soil under water, or by 
uncovering land through public drainage. 



FARM LAW 609 

Rights in Riparian Lands. — Alluvial additions to lands belonging to 
several owners are to be divided among the riparian proprietors by extend- 
ing their side lines to the nearest river bank, so as to give each owner the 
accretion formed in front of his own tract. The extent of the old frontage 
upon the water is the most important factor in determining the new 
frontage, the bearings and courses of the side lines being of minor 
importance. 

If an island forms in a navigable stream, the owner of the land 
opposite acquires no title to it, even if by accretion it reaches and unites 
with his land on the shore. 

Title by Deed. — One who acquires a farm by the will or as the heir of 
one who died owning, it, simply takes whatever title the testator or 
intestate owner had at the time of his death — no more, no less. The 
law takes care of and assures him all his rights. But one who purchases 
a farm from its living owner is obliged to look out for himself and make 
sure either that he gets that for which he bargained and paid, or if he does 
not, that he is insured against loss. Everyone who purchases a farm 
desires, of course, a perfect title, one which shows the absolute right of 
property and possession. It is the duty of one who sells real property 
to make the title good, since a good title is implied in every contract to 
sell land. A buyer who stipulates for a good title must be given one 
which is marketable, meaning that the title is not only valid, but must 
be acceptable as security for a loan, and one that is beyond and free 
from reasonable doubt. A title is not marketable where it is exposed 
to litigation to defend it, or where it is open to reasonable doubt as to its 
validity, such as a question in title depending on the statute of limitations. 

An addition to or change in a deed does not make it void if made by 
consent of both parties. An erasure or interlineation made before its 
execution does not affect the validity of a deed, but if made after execu- 
tion and delivery will make it void. 

The Warranty Deed. — The covenant of warranty, or a warranty deed, 
is one in which the grantor warrants and undertakes to defend the title. 
It means protection or indemnity in case of disturbance. If the grant 
is ousted by a superior title, the grantor agrees to make compensation 
for the loss sustained by the failure of the title and undertakes to protect 
the premises conveyed against all lawful claims and demands existing 
at the time of the grant. He assures a permanent and undisturbed 
possession to the grantee. A warranty does not run against baseless 
attacks upon the title. 

Since a general covenant of warranty is held not to embrace a covenant 
against encumbrances, these should be specifically covenanted against. 
An encumbrance upon land is a right or an interest to it subsisting in a 
third person and lessening its value. Any lien, encumbrance, or servitude 
resting upon land will come within the term "encumbrance." 

39 



610 FARM MANAGEMENT 

No cause of action arises upon a covenant of warranty until an evic- 
tion, either actual or constructive, has taken place. To constitute an 
eviction, the occupant of land must be dispossessed by one who has the 
real title to the premises. 

Rights of Way (Appurtenance). — The term "right of way" is used 
in farm law to describe a right belonging to a person — a mere intangible 
right to cross over a tract of land. It denotes a right or vested privilege 
of passage over the land of another. A conveyance of land carries an 
appurtenant right of way. The rights of the owner of a right of way are 
paramount to those of the owner of the servient land. If the way has 
defined Hmits, the owner of it has not only the right of free passage over 
the traveled part, but of every part within these Hmits. Although 
generally a right of way rests in a grant, yet it may be acquired by 
prescription by an adverse, exclusive, and uninterrupted use for the 
requisite length of time. Even if the grant is oral, although void under 
the statute of frauds, yet an unassailable right will be secured if the ease- 
ment is enjoyed until the statute of Hmitations has expired. 

Located Right of Way Fixed. — Once a right of way has been selected 
and located, it cannot be materially changed by either party without 
the other's consent, but a temporary change in the course of the way made 
for the convenience of either of the landowners is not an abandonment 
of the original route. The owners of the land where the right of way is 
located are under no obligation to repair a way. The owner of the right 
of way is bound to keep up, maintain, and protect the way for use But 
he has no right to inclose it by fences except where it lies along one side 
only of the servient land and fences are necessary to prevent passing 
live stock from trespassing on the adjoining land. 

Naked Right of Way. — A naked grant of right of way will not preclude 
the grantor from putting up gates and bars at the ends of the way. The 
gates or bars must not, of course, interfere to an unreasonable extent 
with the proper use of the way. The mere putting up of gates or bars 
which can be opened and passed through by anybody at will, will not 
extinguish the easement, even if they are kept up for the whole statutory 
limitation period; but if the way is inclosed permanently in a field, and 
the ground over which it ran is plowed up and cultivated for the limitation 
period, the easement will be extinguished. 

Retention of Rights of Way. — The owner of a right of way created 
by grant need not use it all the time nor even frequently in order to 
retain it — no presumption that the right has been abandoned arises 
from the fact that the way is not used continuously. Mere neglect to 
use the way for any length of time short of the statute of limitations will 
not work an extinguishment of the easement; the disuse must be accom- 
panied by an intention to abandon the way. A way not used for twenty 
years is presumed to have been abandoned. An open and visible private 



FARM LAW 611 

way across land at the time it is conveyed is notice to the new owner of 
the existence of a burdening easement ; but if the way is obHterated through 
disuse so that the purchaser has no notice of it, the easement is said to 
be extinguished. 

Farm Workers and Laborers. Legal Relation of Farmer and His 
Workers. — In the United States, all persons who work for others are 
classed in law as servants, no matter what the grade or character of their 
employment The legal relation, then, between the farmer and his 
worker, is that of. master and servant. That relation today rests upon a 
contract by which one person engages to serve another and the other to 
pay wages or other compensation for the service. The farmer's con- 
tracts for labor hired by him to begin the next day are valid for a year, 
although oral. If the work is not performed within a year, the contract 
must be in writing to be valid. 

Right to Discharge. — When a farmer hires a person to work for him, 
if no definite time is set for employment to last, its continuance depends 
upon the will of either party, and the farmer may at any time, with or 
without reason, dismiss the worker. Or the contract will end if the 
laborer becomes permanently ill or too disabled to do his work. The 
servant may be discharged for a good cause, as, for instance, if the servant 
commits a crime, is guilty of immoralities with another servant in the 
household, or is absent without leave from his work when his employer's 
interests would suffer by his absence, for drunkenness, for dishonesty, 
carelessness, disrespect, or disobedience. 

Right to Quit. — As the farmer has an absolute right to discharge a 
laborer hired for no definite length of time, so the laborer has the corre- 
sponding right to quit the service at his pleasure. A servant can not be 
required to labor an unreasonable number of hours every day, or in 
unlawful pursuits, or on Sundays beyond caring for live stock or in a 
case of urgent necessity. A servant can not be required to do a different 
work from that for which he was hired, yet he may be called upon in 
emergencies where his aid is necessary. 

If a farmer provides his hired men with board and lodging, a man may 
quit if the one is not suitable and clean or the other not sound and 
wholesome. 

A laborer discharged before his time is up, although for good cause, 
is entitled to his wages up to the time of his dismissal; and a servant 
employed for a definite time and discharged before it is up, without a 
sufficient cause, is entitled to compensation up to the end of the term 
for which he was engaged. Such compensation will be the agreed wages if 
the servant has diligently tried and failed to get other work, but if he 
earns anything before the end of the term it will be lessened by the sum 
earned. If a servant quits work without a valid excuse before his time 
is up or before the work he was hired to do is done, he will be entitled 



612 FARM MANAGEMENT 

to nothing. If no definite wages are agreed upon, the servant's compen- 
sation will be what his services are reasonably worth, and this generally 
will be the usual wages paid at the same time and place for services of 
the same kind. 

Liabilities and Rights of the Farmer as a Master. — It is a long standing 
maxim of the law that whatever one does by an agent or servant is the 
same in effect as if he did it by himself, and a second legal maxim is that 
when one of two innocent persons must suffer, the loss shall fall upon 
him who put it in the power of a third person to cause it. A farmer 
carrying corn to mill has been held liable for damage to the miller's 
machinery by an iron bolt previously put there by the hired man, of 
which the farmer was ignorant and innocent. The owner of a cow known 
to be vicious to strangers has been held liable for injuries to a person 
engaged to milk the animal assuming that she was gentle. 

In Massachusetts and New Hampshire, it has been held that a person 
who entices or persuades a servant away from other employment is liable 
in damages to the master. 

An agreement to farm land on shares is a contract of service and 
not a lease. A cropper has no interest in the land. Such an agreement 
does not create the relation of landlord and tenant and constitutes a 
clear distinction. 

Legal Status of Crops. — It is often of the highest importance to the 
farmer to know when the products of his farm are to be deemed real estate 
and a part of the land, and when they are personal property to be dealt 
with regardless of the ownership of the soil. The various relationships 
of purchasers, tenants, mortgagees, executors, heirs, and creditors are 
complex. In general, growing crops follow the title to the soil in which 
they are rooted. They are a part of the land on which they stand when 
both belong to the same owner. If not expressly reserved when the 
land is sold, growing crops will pass by the deed as an appurtenance to it. 
Ungarnered crops pass to the purchaser of the land on a mortgage 
foreclosure sale, but those that are harvested before the sale do not. 
If a crop is actually standing upon the land when it is sold on mortgage 
foreclosure, it will pass by the sale to the purchaser notwithstanding 
there has been a previous sale or mortgage of the crop made by the 
farmer to another person. To be good against a subsequent owner of the 
land, a grant of a right to gather fruit growing or to be grown must be in 
writing and recorded like a deed. 

Effect of Severing Crops. — All crops cease to be real estate and become 
personal property as soon as they are severed from the land. Thus, a 
crop grown upon a farm which is exempt as a homestead, as long as it 
remains unharvested is exempt also, but it loses its immunity after it 
has been gathered. 

Damages for the Loss or Destruction of Crops. — A farmer whose growing 



FARM LAW 613 

crops are destroyed by the fault or negligence of another may recover 
their value from the careless or faulty one. The measure of damages 
when growing crops are injured or destroyed is their value at the time 
of the injury or destruction and not their value in the market when 
matured and harvested or during the selling season. 

The cost of a growing crop up to the time of its destruction is not 
the measure. 

Rights of Landlords and Tenants in the Crops. — In the ordinary case 
when a farm is leased for a fixed rent, whether payable in money or in 
produce, or in both, the crops grown and harvested during the tenancy 
belong to the tenant. In a number of states, however, there are statutes 
which give the landlord a lien for rent upon the crops grown upon the 
leased land. This lien for rent attaches to the crops as well when the rent 
is payable partly in produce, as when it is payable wholly in money. 

An agreement between the landlord and another person that the latter 
shall occupy and cultivate a farm belonging to the former and that each 
shall furnish a part of the seed, implements, and stock, and divide the 
products, creates not a partnership but the relation of landlord and ten- 
ant. The owner and tenant of a farm leased for a term of years upon an 
agreement to divide the product equally, are tenants in common of the 
crops. When no time for dividing the crop is fixed, the division is due 
when the crop is harvested. A tenant's agreement to deliver to the land- 
lord half of all the crops is not fully performed until the shares have 
been divided and set apart. A cropper's share is due only when the crop 
is harvested. A cropper has no interest in the growing crop that he can 
sell or mortage, except in cases where the statute provides otherwise. 

Considered as farm produce, crops and manure are essentially differ- 
ent. Manure, since it is never sold unless by a very thriftless husband- 
man, is returned to the land to enrich the soil. It is therefore seldom 
or never to be deemed personal property, but always as belonging to the 
land. Manure made upon a leased farm by the consumption of the 
product of the farm belongs to the landlord and not to the tenant. A 
tenant has no right to remove manure produced on leased land during his 
term unless it is produced by stock in excess of the number that the farm 
can support and which are fed by fodder procured elsewhere. When 
that is the case, the excess manure belongs to the tenant. 

Laws Relating to Live Stock. — Penal statutes against cruelty to 
animals are now universal in civilized communities, and they need not be 
particularly cited since their general provisions are familiar. A criminal 
statute provides for the punishment of every person who maliciously 
disfigures any horse, cattle or other animal by injuries wantonly inflicted, 
whether slight or serious, temporary or permanent in effect. 

Estrays. — An estray has been defined legally to be an animal found 
wandering unattended, the owner of which is unknown. It is a roving 



614 FARM MANAGEMENT 

beast, free from the care, control, or custody of its owner, or one unsought, 
unclaimed, or abandoned by him. A domestic animal that has tempo- 
rarily escaped from the custody of its owner and strayed a short distance 
away, but is neither lost nor abandoned, is not properly classed as an 
estray. Every law which authorizes stray animals to be impounded 
and sold must be strictly complied with in every respect for the proceed- 
ings to be valid. 

Animals are said to run at large when they are not under the control 
of any driver, shepherd, or herdsman, but are left to roam wheresoever 
they will. They are beasts wandering and feeding at will, not under the 
immediate supervision and control of anyone, whether on open or 
inclosed land. A horse or colt running at large in the highway contrary 
to law is classed as a nuisance. But cattle grazing in the highway in 
plain view of the owner's family are not running at large. 

The liability of the owner of a domestic animal for an injury done by 
it depends in general upon his negligence, and that is measured by the con- 
sideration of whether or not he ought in reason to have anticipated that 
the brute would, if the opportunity offered, inflict such injury, and 
whether, if he ought to have expected this, he took or omitted proper 
steps to prevent occurrence. Thus the owner of the beast that did the 
inj ury was exonerated in the following cases : 

Where hogs broke into an adjoining field and killed a cow and her 
newborn calf, where a turkey-cock strutting and gobbling in a highway 
frightened a horse into running away, where bees attacked and severely 
stung horses going along the highway, when for 7 years they had occupied 
the same place and behaved well, where a bull jumped a strong fence that 
had restrained him for a fortnight and gored a mare in the next 
field. And a number of other instances may be cited. The owner of an 
animal unknown to be vicious is ordinarily not liable for an injury it does 
in a place where it has a right to be, but it is otherwise if the animal is 
where it ought not to be when it does the damage. 

The owner of diseased cattle is liable in damages if he allows them 
to run at large when he knows or has good reason to know that they have 
an infectious disease, if they infect other stock. But if the owner of 
scabby sheep keeps his flock confined in his own pasture, he is not liable 
in damages to his neighbor whose sheep in an adjoining field become 
infected. When anyone who owns a drove of hogs which he knows to 
have a dangerous and contagious disease sells the animals to a dealer in 
live stock, who in turn innocently and ignorantly sells them to a customer, 
the original owner is liable to such customer when the hogs purchased 
communicate the disease to his other healthy hogs. He who deceitfully 
sells a horse which he knows to be infected with glanders to a purchaser, 
who in caring for the beast, contracts and dies of the disease, is liable 
for injury. 



FARM LAW 615 

Runaway Horses. — It is negligence to leave a horse loose and unat- 
tended in a public street, and its owner is liable for the injuries the animal 
by running away inflicts upon a person not himself in fault. 

Agistus. — An agistus is a person who for hire takes the live stock of 
others to graze or pasture upon his land. He is not an insurer of the 
animals he takes to pasture, but is only liable for negligence. He is 
bound to exercise ordinary diligence in safeguarding the beasts entrusted 
to his care. An agistus is under an obligation to keep his pastures 
properly fenced, but such obligation rests upon him in order to prevent 
the animals from escaping and doing harm or trespassing to the injury 
of others, consequently he is not required to fence the bank of a navigable 
stream. 

Progeny. — The offspring of all domestic animals belong to those who 
own the dams at the time when the births occur, unless otherwise 
stipulated by contract. An exception is the case where a dam has been 
hired out temporarily for a definite time, and her offspring is born during 
the term. Unless the progeny is expressly reserved to the owner of the 
animal, it goes to the lessee. But one who has possession to pasture is 
not entitled to progeny born in his custody. 

Sales. — There is no subject of greater importance and magnitude in 
the law than that relating to the change of ownership of property from 
one to another person by contract of sale and delivery. And the 
questions covering sale and delivery of goods and chattels are constantly 
coming up — questions which are not only numerous, various, and weighty, 
but exceedingly puzzling. 

Essentials of a Sale. — The essentials of a sale — a sale being defined as 
a transfer of absolute or general ownership in a thing for a price in money 
or other recompense of value — are the assent of both buyer and seller to 
the sale, a price and an agreement as to price, by persons legally com- 
petent to make the sale. 

An offer to sell property imposes no obligation upon the owner until 
it is accepted according to its terms. Such an offer may be withdrawn 
any time before it is accepted. To make the offer binding, it must be 
accepted unconditionally. 

Completing sales is accomplished by an actual or symbolical delivery 
of the thing sold. Any act which is done with the intention to transfer 
the ownership and which changes the dominion over the property from 
seller to buyer is a delivery. 

Use of Warehouse Receipts. — Transferring a warehouse receipt is a 
common and well understood method of delivering personal property 
stored in a warehouse. It seems to be tacitly admitted that the delivery of 
a warehouse receipt representing, for instance, a certain number of bushels 
of wheat, a part of a great quantity in a grain elevator, operates as a con- 
structive delivery and transfer of title to the wheat for which it stands. 



616 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Warranty in Sales. — A warranty in a sale of personal property is a 
contract by the seller that the article sold is what he states and represents 
it to be in respect of its quality and condition. It is always representa- 
tive although every representation is not a warranty. No particular 
form of words is necessary in order to make a warranty. Any assertion 
by the seller concerning the quality of the subject of the sale which induces 
the buyer to purchase or on which he relies in buying, will amount to a 
warranty. The offer of personal property for sale by one in possession 
of it is an implied warranty of title. 

There are express and implied warranties upon sales of seed and nur- 
sery stock. A nurseryman, for example, who sells peach trees, and rep- 
resents that they will bear large white juicy peaches readily sold, 
warrants that they will produce such fruit and is liable for a breach of 
the warranty. A person advertising seed rice for sale representing the 
rice to be good rice, is liable to damages if it does not sprout when planted 
properly in due season. When a market gardener applies to a dealer for 
seed to produce the earliest possible crop of peas and is sold seed which the 
seller guarantees to "pick 4 or 5 days earlier than any other seed on the 
market" there is a warranty implied that such seed will produce an early 
and ample crop of its kind. When a shop keeper delivers wild mustard 
seed to a customer who asks for cabbage seed and does not know the dif- 
ference, he is liable for a breach of warranty whether or not he himself 
knew what the seed was. 

It is a general rule that in a sale of goods for human food there is an 
implied warranty that the articles are wholesome. Thus it has been 
decided that one who sells a heifer knowing that it is diseased and unfit 
for human food, is liable for damages. It is sound advice to the farmer 
to take no chances in selling animals for human food when he knows them 
to be unfit, even though he makes no misrepresentation to the buyer. 
He may escape the payment of damages, but he is almost certain to be put 
to the annoyance and expense of a lawsuit. 

An oral warranty of horses made at the time the price is agreed upon 
but before the bill of sale is delivered binds the seller. Thus if one selling 
a horse merely says to the buyer before the bargain is struck, "this horse 
is sound," he warrants the animal to be sound. But after a horse has 
been actually sold and delivered, a statement to the buyer by the seller 
that the animal is sound is no warranty. One who sells a horse which he 
knows is unsound and represents it as sound and so misleads a purchaser 
unable by ordinary observation to perceive the brute's defects, is guilty 
of a fraud that nullifies the sale. A warranty that a horse is sound does 
not cover visible defects, observed and mentioned by the buyer 
in purchasing, nor yet defective eyes or lameness, when noticed by 
the buyer. 



FARM LAW 617 

Factors or Commission Merchants. — A person to whom goods are 
consigned to sell for the consignor's account is known to the law as a 
factor. The factor is often called a commission merchant. A factor 
is an agent who has the actual or constructive possession of the property 
he is empowered to sell. Thus he may have the goods in his own ware- 
house, or he may hold a bill of lading from a carrier, or a warehouse 
receipt representing and entitling the holder to the delivery of the prop- 
erty. One who is employed to sell another's property and not put in 
possession of it is a broker, not a factor. 

Unless hampered by instructions, a factor may sell the goods consigned 
to him at his discretion in the usual course of trade, without consulting 
his principal. He may sell the property in his own name, and he may 
sell on credit unless directed not to do so. If the purchaser is apparently 
responsible and the factor acts in good faith, he may accept a note for the 
price. A factor has full authority to collect and receive payment for 
property sold by him. 

A factor must sell goods consigned him for sale in the market where he 
transacts his business generally. A factor who ships to another market 
than his own, goods consigned to him to sell, makes himself liable for the 
deficit if they fail to bring as high a price as that ruling in his home 
mlarket at the time of sale. 

The factor's employment is a personal one, he has no right to pass 
his agency on to another; it has been held that even his death will not 
authorize the representatives of his estate to dispose of the principal's 
goods. 

A consignor is entitled to the exercise of all the skill, ability, and indus- 
try of his factor in selling the consigned property upon the best obtainable 
terms. It is the duty of a commission merchant to sell the property 
entrusted to him for sale for the highest procurable price, but he is only 
bound to use proper and diligent efforts to get it. A commission mer- 
chant does his whole duty when he sells the consigned property at the 
market price in his own market and within a reasonable time. It is the 
duty of a factor to keep correct accounts of sales and to have such ac- 
counts open to the inspection of his principals. It is his duty also to 
take such care of the goods consigned to him for sale as a reasonably pru- 
dent man would take of his own property similarly situated. The ut- 
most good faith is demanded of an agent in all his transactions with his 
principal in everything relating to the subject of his employment. When 
goods are consigned to a factor for sale, the consignor has a right gener- 
ally to control the sale according to his pleasure by instructions given at 
the outset or from_ time to time afterwards; and the factor, if he has made 
no advances or incurred no liabilities, is bound to obey orders, but a factor 
is not bound to obey instructions contrary to an express agreement he 
made at the beginning. 



618 FARM MANAGEMENT 

If a factor honestly and diligently does his best to get a good price for 
the property consigned to him to sell, he is not liable to the owner for 
selling it below the market value. If a factor returns to the consignor 
in a damaged condition property which he received sound, he is liable for 
the depreciation in its value unless he can prove that the damage oc- 
curred without his fault. A factor who reports sales for less than what he 
receives, and destroys his books and accounts while his employer is inspect- 
ing them, may be held liable for unauthorized assumption of ownership. 
A factor who fails to exercise reasonable care and prudence to sell to a 
responsible buyer, is liable for the loss if a loss follows. He is not liable 
for a loss from his refusal to sell the property on credit to a purchaser 
whose responsibility he honestly doubts, and he is not liable, if he is not 
negligent, for loss or damage of his principal's goods while in his custody. 

The general interests of justice and the safety of those compelled to 
repose confidence in others, alike demand that courts inflexibly maintain 
that an agent employed to sell can not make himself the purchaser. 

A factor's services in selling property consigned to him to sell are 
compensated for commonly by a commission on the sale, called in law 
books, "factorage." A factor has a lien upon the property intrusted to 
him to sell for his compensation and expenses. When a factor makes 
advances upon goods consigned to him for sale, there is an irhplied agree- 
ment by the consignor to repay him a deficit in case the goods fail to 
bring enough to cover the advances. 

A delivery of goods to an agent to sell on commission is not a sale and 
the title remains with the consignor until sold to a bona fide purchaser 

State Legislation 

Each State has passed legislation affecting the agriculture within its. 
borders, some regulatory, some beneficial, some penalizing. 

An understanding of the variety in agricultural law can be readily 
gathered from the items which, for States listed below, have been selected 
as of outstanding interest. But here again the individual's interest or 
the needs of the moment may influence judgment, so that what one 
man considers vital may be listed as of only passing value by another. ^^^ 

Nebraska, among its laws as they affect farmers, finds helpful the law 
regulating the incorporation of cooperative companies, first passed in 
1913 and amended two or three times since. 

In substance, the law permitting the formation of cooperative companies is 
designed to allow 25 or more producers or consumers, or both, to associate and incor- 
porate as a business organizaton of limited partnership. The field of cooperative 
endeavor must be stated, together with the name of the association, its principal place 
of business, conditions of memberships, maximum earnings of capital furnished by 
members, scope, names of the Board of Managers, basis of apportioning net profits or 
losses, and maximum liabiUty of members. 



FARM LAW 619 

Under the law, farmers can combine for mutual benefit to conduct legitimate 
business through the medium of associations, as cooperative credit associations and 
cooperative companies with certain limitations as defined in the statutes. 

A state hail insurance law has served to automatically regulate pre- 
miums charged by commerical companies. 

Under this law, the State Insurance Board is authorized and directed to create a 
branch department to handle hail insurance. For purposes of enforcing, the state is 
divided into zones. Insurance of growing grain — wheat, oats, barley, flax, corn, rye — • 
against loss by hail is permitted to provide protection of either $10 or $15 per acre. 
Premium rates depend on the zone in which the grain is growing and range from 25 i 
to 60 f5 for $10 worth of protection and from 40 ff to 90 (ii for $15. Details of informing 
farmers, collecting premiums, adjusting losses, etc. are a part of the act. 

Very close to the top of the list are the state quarantine laws regulating 
in-coming shipment of live stock or plants infected with a serious disease 
or dangerous pest. The potato industry has been helped by a state law 
establishing grades and providing for inspection at shipping points. 
Benefits resulting from equality of freight rates and railroad service 
have accrued to farmers through the establishment of a State railway 
commission, even though this empowering act was not passed particularly 
as farmer legislation. Larger districts, better schools, and greater 
advantages to farmers' children are the products of a law designed to 
bring about the consolidation of rural schools. 

New Jersey is on the threshold of new legislation deemed advantage- 
ous to farmers through the activities of its State Farm Bureau Federa- 
tion. Present legislation of value centers around the organization, 
4 years ago, of a Commission of Agriculture, with coordinated depart- 
ments. A farmers' cooperative law to permit collective sale of products 
is mentioned as being important in the sale of farm products. 

The New Jersey State Department of Agriculture was organized in 1916, consisting 
of bureaus of animal industry, lands, crops and markets, statistics, inspection. The 
department fell heir to former legislation having to do with the prevention of disease 
among Uve stock and the shutting out or control of injurious insects. In addition 
it took over the duties common to most State departments of this character, such as 
stallion registration, collection of crop and other agricultural statistics, use of lands 
for agricultural purposes, improvement of agricultural methods, improvement in 
transportation, establishment of market rates, irrigation, and drainage of lands. 

The act providing for the formation and regulation of cooperative agricultural, 
dairy, or horticultural associations went into effect in 1920. Under its provisions, 
cooperation for mutual help, if conducted without capital stock and profit, is allowed 
for not less than five people engaged in agriculture. The act is rather specific in 
that it defines the scope of activities that such association, through its agent, may 
perform, these to be services "connected with the production, manufacture, preser- 
vation, drying, canning, storing, handhng, utilization, marketing, or sale of agricultural, 
dairy, or horticultural products" produced by its members, or the purchase or hiring 
for or use by them of supplies, as live stock, machinery, and equipment, or the hiring 
of labor. A certificate of incorporation is to be provided for while full details regulate 
the conduct of business, limitations, membership liability and responsibility, etc. 



620 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Missouri has a law deemed of value permitting cooperative associa- 
tions. A pure seed law is considered exceedingly good as it prevents 
dumping of impure seeds of any kind into the state. Laws regulating 
the control of hog cholera and the sale of commercial fertilizers are 
benefitting farmers. 

The law authorizing the incorporation of agricultural cooperative associations 
provides for mutual buying, selling, manufacturing, storing, transporting, or other 
handling or dealing in or with agricultural, dairy, or similar products, and, under certain 
restrictions, the purchasing or selling of groceries, provisions, and other articles of 
merchandise to shareholders in such farmers' associations. At least 12 members are 
necessary in the formation of a cooperative association. The association must be 
incorporated and conducted in line with the regulation governing such organizations. 
Profit getting and sharing is possible under the Missouri empowering act. 

The Missouri seed law is designed to protect purchasers from seed which is impure 
or not true to name by requiring proper labeling. It applies to practically all farm 
seeds (other than garden and truck crops), such as grasses, sorghums, clovers, peas, 
beans, vetches, forage plants, buckwheat, flax, rape, barley, field corn, broom corn, 
oats, rye, wheat and all other cereals. The law applies to sales of 10 lb. or more, 
and prescribes that each lot must bear a label stating (a) the common name, (6) 
approximate percentage by weight of purity, (c) approximate total percentage by 
weight of weed seeds, {d) the names of certain weed seeds or bulblets if present in 
more than stated amounts, (e) approximate percentage of germination including state- 
ment of year and month when tested, (/) full name and address of vendor, {g) name 
of state where seed was grown. Certain exceptions apply to farmers who are pro- 
ducing seed for local sale or for sale to be recleaned or otherwise prepared. 

Minnesota established a State Department of Agriculture in 1919 
which promises, once it is fully organized, to give considerable service to 
the farmers of that state. The department is charged with regulatory 
duties pertaining to marketing, and the securing of agricultural statistics. 
The same legislature also provided for control of feeds offered in the market 
by requiring proper labeling and providing for inspection, sample collec- 
tion and analysis: A State-wide road program affording good truck roads 
for the state, and a law providing for a state entomologist and nursery 
inspection, are both of material help, the former, in particular, being a 
measure which promises much to agriculture. 

Arizona. — Perhaps the most outstanding Arizona law affecting 
agriculture is a water code with provisions for establishing water rights 
that will tend to eliminate controversies. 

Under the law, natural stream flows unappropriated or not used for 5 years 
revert to the public. For protection, a qualified State Water Commissioner is 
appointed, whose duties are to survey water resources and make recommendations for 
developing, to formulate and pass necessary rules and regulations concerning the 
appropriation and distribution of the waters of the state for domestic, municipal, 
irrigation, stock watering, water power, and mining uses. The act contains 62 sections 
and defines in much detail all rights, privileges, and concessions acknowledged or 
permitted there under. 



FARM LAW 621 

New York. — Concerning New York state legislation which has been 
of value to its farming interests, emphasis is placed upon four acts which 
have been designed (a) to legalize cooperative stock companies, (6) to 
provide for cooperative membership associations for marketing purposes, 
(c) to employ state aid in the construction of township highways, {d) to 
require more rigid inspection of seeds, feeds, and fertilizers. 

North Carolina has adopted a state act creating a new type of farmers' 
communities.* A law providing for the organization and regulation of 
a credit union has been enacted in the state. North Carolina has also 
adopted the Torre ns system of land registration. 

California has so many good laws for the protection of her agriculture 
that selection of those outstanding is rather difficult. Several distinctive 
types, each one of value, are therefore offered. 

California State Market Commission Act. — Under this act, the State 
created a Commission to carry on the business of receiving from the pro- 
ducer, agricultural, fish, dairy, and farm products, and to sell and dispose 
of these on commission. The management of the work is invested in a 
Market Director, who is empowered to establish in all cities and towns 
which he considers suitable commission markets to handle these products, 
where producers can consign their product for sale and distribution. 

The gathering and disseminating of information on subjects relating 
to the marketing of California products were by the act made a duty of 
the commission. Restrictions are so placed upon the Director that he 
can not engage in any other line of business during his term of office, 
so that his whole time and attention are devoted to the duties of the 
office. Neither can he hold any stock or other interest in any produce 
commission business. To insure the faithful performance of duty, the 
Director is bonded in the sum of $50,000. 

California Standards for Packing Fresh Fruit. — The California stan- 
dards were established to regulate packs of fruits and to insure honesty of 
pack. 

Under this act all fresh fruits (except oranges) when packed, shipped, or offered 
for sale, must be mature but not over-ripe, well colored for the variety and locality, 
virtually uniform in quality, virtually free from insect and fungus pests, rots, bruises, 
frost injury, sunburn, and other serious defect, and, except in cases of unpacked 
fruits and vegetables, shall be virtually uniform in size. All layers shall be approxi- 
mately the same numerical count when packed in straight-sided containers. In 
sloping-sided containers, no layer below the top layer shall have a greater numerical 
count than the former. 

The shipment must be of virtually uniform size, that is, peaches, pears, and quinces 
are not to vary more than ^i in. (through cross section) and apricots, plums, prunes, 
cherries, berries, not more than ^^ in. 

*For full account see "Rural Life" by J. C. Galpin. 



622 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



Standard containers are provided for by law as follows: 
Table 246. — Legal Requirement for Market Containers — California 



Standard containers are given as: 



Depth inside, 
inches 



Width inside, 
inches 



Length outside, 
inches 



Standard pear box 

Half pear box 

Standard peach box 

Standard peach box 

Standard peach box 

Standard crate 

Standard crate 

Standard crate 

Standard grape crate (with heavy 

cleat 1^6 by ^Hg in.) 

Standard grape drum (containing 

2,923 cu. in.) 

Standard grape keg (2,923 cu. in.). 

Standard lug box 

Standard cherry lug 

Standard cherry lug 

Standard cherrv box 



or2 

4>i 
4>i 
4% 
41-i 
4V2 
4^i 

4^ 

14 

5% 

W2 
214 



IIH 

UK 
iiK 
iiM 
11^ 

16 
16 
16 

16 

15 H 

14 
11,H 

9 

9 



19M 
19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 
17M 
17^ 
17M 

17M 



17K 
19% 
19% 
19% 



Standard apricot, plum, and grape basket — 8 in. square on top; 6^2 in. on bottom 
and 4 in. deep, inside measurements. Standard berry baskets — dry pint containing 
an interior capacity of approximately 33%o cu. in., and dry one half pint — approxi- 
mately 16%o cu. in. Standard cantaloupe crates — 12 by 12 by 221^ in., to be packed 
with 36 to 45 cantaloupes; 4 by 12 by 22 J^ in., to be packed with 12 to 15 cantaloupes; 
11 by 11 by 221^ in., packed with 45-54; 13 by 13 by 22^ packed with 36-45; 4^ 
by 13 by 223^ packed with 12-15. 

Table grapes must show sugar content of not less than 17 per cent (Balling Scale 
except Emperor, Gros Coleman, and Cornichon, which shall show not less than 16 
per cent Balling Scale). 

Oranges are deemed properly mature when juices contain soluble solids equal to or in 
excess of 8 parts to every part of acid contained in the juice. They must have attained 
25 per cent yellow or orange color before picking; if have 70 per cent color at picking, 
deemed ready irrespective of analysis of juice. Shall be virtually free from insect 
and fungous diseases, and other serious defects. Unfit for shipment when frosted. 

All boxes, crates, packages, when packed for transportation for sale, shall bear in 
plain letters the name of the orchard, if any, and name of those who first packed the 
fruit, with locality where the fruit is grown. Wilful violation of this Act shall be 
considered a misdemeanor. 

California Land Colonization and Rural Credits Act. — Under date of 
May 18, 1915, an Act was approved by the Legislature empowering the 
governor to appoint, before September 1, 1915, a commission of five 
members, citizens of this State, to investigate and consider the question 
of land colonization and various forms of land banks; also cooperative 
credit units and other rural credit societies, with a special view to the 
needs of rural communities of this State. 



FARM LAW 623 

California Workmen's Compensation Act. — The Workmen's Compen- 
sation, Insurance and Safety Act, as promulgated by a recent California 
legislature, is designed to protect a,ll workmen, but excepts labor engaged 
in farm work or domestic service. It touches the farmer only when he 
employs non-agricultural or non-domestic labor. However, if a farmer 
so elects he may come under the act and include his farm laborers. 

Under the act, a farmer may estimate and state his own wage value and that of 
the working members of his family, add the total to the payroll, and insure himself and 
his family against the consequences of injury. 

The rate for compensation insurance appUcable to farm and ranch operations, 
covering all employments incident thereto, including domestic service in the farmer's 
home, is $1 . 50 on each $100 paid out for labor during the year. 

Sometimes the line drawn between farm labor and that which is not farm labor is, 
and has to be, more arbitrary than logical. For instance, if a farmer has a few stumps 
to blast out or a corner of his place to be cleared, his regular farm policy will cover him, , 
but if he has any considerable tract to be cleared and made ready to become a farm the 
rate will be $2.80. If considerable blasting has to be done, a full explanation of the 
operations in contemplation should be forwarded to the fund before the work begins, 
in order that the risk may be provided for understandingly and the insurance policy 
be made to cover the risk. It may be possible to have one man do all the blasting 
and handling of dynamite while all the other workers remain at a safe distance, in 
which case the rate will be $25 on the $100 of payroll for that man which, while 
it looks high, and probably is, need not figure out to a very large sum inasmuch as, 
if the work is made ready, the blasting for a large tract can be done in a very few days. 

If a farmer desires to erect buildings, dig wells, install irrigation systems, all such 
employees are under the protection of the compensation act because they are not farm 
labor. The rate for well boring is $2.62, but for well digging in the old-fashioned way 
it is $12.25. For constructing buildings, the rate is $3.32, for millwrights erecting 
or repairing machinery, it is $3.50. The rate for constructing irrigation canals (no 
rock work, blasting, or steam shovel work) is $3.60, and for laying irrigation pipes for 
distributing water it is $3.76. All ordinary farm work in connection with irrigation 
systems and extensions of distributing ditches, when the work is done exclusively by 
farm laborers, in connection with their other farm duties, is covered by the regular 
farm policy at the $1.50 rate. 

County and municipal regulations are too variable to permit their 
inclusion here. 

Conclusion to Farm Law. — As one studies the legal side of the farming 
business, he will find many acts upon the statute books. Some are 
useless, a few possibly vicious, a number dead issues, but, on the whole, 
they comprise a satisfactory series for the protection of producer, trans- 
porter, selling agent, consumer, and society as a whole. 



PART III 
INTRODUCTION TO PART III 

Part III is inserted for a little discussion of the personal side of 
farm management, to touch upon the qualifications and requirements 
sought in those to whom properties are entrusted, and to outline some- 
thing of the duties devolving upon a farm manager. Getting started 
is of importance to students about to step out of their classrooms into a 
busy, somewhat exacting, and occasionally none too sympathetic business 
world, hence the personal tone has been deliberately kept in line with 
the way the original material was prepared and delivered to college 
classes. 



40 625 



CHAPTER XXVI 
THE FARM MANAGER 

Selling Service : Duties : Qualifications : Outlook 

Of the more than 7,000,000 farms in the United States, about 10 
per cent are handled by managers, or roughly 1 in 10. Of these managers, 
some are self-made men, often elevated from the ranks, some are owners' 
relatives, while a goodly number are recruited from agricultural schools 
and colleges. Subdivision of large holdings (in the west), change to 
intensive farming methods, retirement of active farmers, non-resident 
investment in farm lands, and development of estates, are factors tending 
to increase the demand for managers. As the number of agricultural 
college graduates who enter the field increases, their influence is seen in 
their selection of other trained men to work for or with them, thus intro- 
ducing a tendency to replace the so-called practical men with college- 
trained men. How fast this replacement can take place depends on the 
degree of success attending the efforts of graduates to prove their ability 
in a given section. 

Definition and Status of the Farm Manager. — A farm manager may 
be defined as a man in charge of an agricultural enterprise large enough 
to necessitate use of his full time in supervision and business details, 
who does none of the actual labor of production but who is charged with 
the selection of crops and products, the organizing of the work, its proper 
execution, the care of labor, the selling of the product, the keeping of 
records and farm books, the handling of all funds and financial trans- 
actions, and the observance of legal regulations. 

A farmer is, under this definition, not necessarily a farm manager, 
since the latter is charged with business details surrounding determination 
of policy, plans for establishing and conducting operations, and dis- 
position of the final product. A farm manager therefore stands relatively 
high in the scale of farm personnel. A graphic illustration may serve to 
indicate the relative position of the salaried personnel of a farm 
organization. 

Employer 

As capitalist, investor, board of directors, stockholders. 

General Manager 

Usually not in residence upon a farm, employed for enterprises involving more 
than farming; determines policies and guards the broader issues; answer- 
able to the employer. 

627 



628 FARM MANAGEMENT 

Farm Manager 

In charge of planning, organizing, and executing the business details of a 
farming enterprise, which may consist of one or more farms, contiguous 
or separate; occasionally not in residence upon the farm; answerable to 
the general manager or directly to the employer, and responsible for work 
of superintendents employed under him. 

Superintendent 

Always in residence upon a farm, in charge of plannin-g and executing the work 
on the farm(s) under his charge, responsible for the proper conduct of 
the foremen employed under him and the safe-guarding of the property 
entrusted to him; answerable to the employer, the general manager, or 
the farm manager, according to the type of organization. 



«.«■" 












^6J^ 









End of Schooling >J 

Each space on this Une represents one year of time. An average of four to six years is required 
for beginner and laborer period. 

Fig. 96. — Graphic presentation of the status of the farm manager. 



Foreman 

In residence upon farm and immediately responsible for the conduct of the 
farming operations, the men employed under him, and the safe-guarding 
of equipment belonging to the lands placed under his cha"rge; answerable 
to superintendent or manager according to type of organization. 

Strawboss 

In residence; a man who is placed in charge of small working groups, often as 
a working leader or pace-maker, and who is held responsible for the con- 
duct of the men and stock during working hours; answerable to the foreman. 



THE FARM MANAGER 629 

Skilled Farm Laborers 

As tractor drivers, long line teamsters, harvester men, machinists, stockmen, 
etc. Answerable for the quaUty and quantity of their work to the straw- 
boss or foreman. 

Semi-skilled Farm Laborers 

As fruit tree pruners, irrigators, mowing machine men, two-horse teamsters, 
milkers, etc. Responsibility same as for skilled farm laborers. 

Unskilled Farm Laborers 

As cotton pickers, pick and shovel men, hay pitchers, certain types of fruit 
pickers, etc.; responsibility same as for skilled farm labor. 

Each successive stage in the progress from unskilled labor up the 
organization ladder calls for the lapse of time so that training, experience, 
and personal capacity can be united to serve the requirements made upon 
the men in their different stages of responsibility. Van Norman^*' 
uses the graphic method of illustrating this. 

Selling Service 

"Selling service," "getting a job," "obtaining a start," or however 
the initial embarking into agriculture may be styled, with a view to 
qualifying for a farm managership, is important to all who must work 
for wages or on salary. Students in agriculture, especially, frequently 
ask the question "How should a man go about it to get a job? In other 
words, when we are through with college (and presumably have obtained 
our diplomas) how shall we sell our knowledge?" 

The difficulty often attached to securing a position warrants some 
consideration of the problem. 

At the outset, one should distinguish between the demand for qualifi- 
cations {i.e., personal characteristics), and for duties (i.e., expected 
performance). An employer usually hires a man upon an estimate of 
his qualifications; he pays for performance. 

To have the matter squarely before us, let us consider (1) what an 
employer seeks in an employee, and (2) what a college trained man has to 
offer. 

What Does an Employer Desire in an Employee? — Taking up the 
first proposition, the whole situation may be summed up in the words 
"the ability to make money honestly." For some men, the word 
"honestly" can be omitted, but the proportion falling into this category 
is relatively small. 

A man new to a position may think that greater stress is placed on 
other factors than the ability to make money. Some employers try to 
expect excessive deference in their employees, others favor pleasant 
companionship, still others frown upon certain personal traits such, 



630 FARM MANAGEMENT 

for instance, as the use of tobacco or indulging in card playing or Sunday 
baseball. But, unless a man has ability to make money, he will usually 
find that his fulfillment of the other requirements will avail him little. 
Other men who have the money-getting ability but exercise less effort 
to curry favor in minor things and apparently enjoy less favoritism are 
more likely to succeed in the long run. 

The insertion of the word "honestly" may warrant some additional 
explanation. While there are men who will wink at transactions 
pretty close to the line between honesty and dishonesty, provided they 
work out successfully, the majority of employers are decidedly against 
countenancing this sort of thing. They figure, and rightly, that a man 
who will utilize such tactics for them would not hesitate to utilize the 
same tactics against them if an opportunity were offered. This does 
not always follow, however, and there are instances of dishonest work 
done by employees for their superiors purely from motives of blind 
devotion and loyalty. In general, however, since the business of the 
country is about 95 per cent based on credit and confidence in one another, 
clear-headed business men see too much danger in encouraging dis- 
honesty. Taken all in all, general experience shows that temptations will 
assail every man, and he who will employ crooked practices for his em- 
ployer is in danger later of sacrificing his employer to his own personal 
private gain. , 

What Has a College Trained Man to Offer? — At the very outset in 
discussing "What has a college trained man to offer?" it is apparent that 
few college graduates have had a chance to demonstrate their abilities 
to earn money. They are selected and employed for other reasons. 
These cannot be so simple as the answer concerning what the employer 
desires. The first factor is a belief that a trained mind is a valuable 
instrument in developing a man. It isn't wholly the array of facts which 
one is able to collect, valuable as these are, which makes a college career 
of greatest worth, but rather the ability acquired to think, to use one's 
brain. Employers therefore find that the college man is good material 
to develop. But it is worthy of note, he does not take a man for what 
he is on graduation, but rather for the possibilities he contains. Sec- 
ondly, a college is a kind of winnowing machine, and those that graduate 
(the question of finances not being considered) are the wheat from the 
chaff of the total grist which enters, and the man who is looking for good 
assistants finds the first elimination already done for him. 

The third consideration which helps the college man is the scarcity 
of good men at the top. As long as this condition exists, college men will 
be given first chance since their training, combined with a very desirable 
admixture of enthusiasm, brightness, energy, and polish, especially fits 
them to succeed. 



THE FARM MANAGER 631 

We may say then that the college man has to offer the employer a 
partly trained mind and practically unlimited possibilities. He usually 
lacks experience, often tact, and has not as a rule had a chance to show 
his earning capacity. 

A College Education. — The United States Department of Education 
is authority for the following statement: "Less than 1 per cent of Ameri- 
can men are college graduates, and yet this 1 per cent has furnished 50 
per cent of the constitutional conventions, 55 per cent of all the presidents, 
36 per cent of all the members of congress, 47 per cent of all the speakers 
of the house of representatives, 54 per cent of all the vice-presidents, 62 
per cent of all the secretaries of state, 50 per cent of the secretaries of 
the treasury, 67 per cent of the attorneys-general, 69 per cent of the 
justices of the supreme court." 

It is not intended to hold up public office as the highest form of suc- 
cess; but the fact that the 1 per cent of college graduates have had such 
a conspicuous part in our public activities indicative of the value of 
college education. If the truth could be determined, the value of 
this education would be demonstrated with the same force in most 
other lines of activity. It is estimated that the man who has had no 
schooling has about one chance in 150,000 of performing distinguished 
service. The man who has an elementary education has four times the 
chance of the man who has no schooling. The high school graduate has 
87 times the chance of the uneducated man, and the college man has 400 
times the chance. And this proportion will apply with just as much force 
to farming as to any other line of activity. 

Looking for a Position. — The foregoing should furnish some ideas as to 
what procedure should be followed in looking for a position. Unless one 
can offer an employer experience sufficient to convince him of one's 
ability to assume immediate responsibility, it is wiser to look for some- 
thing where the owner is either so public spirited, or needs a man so badly 
that he is willing to make considerable personal effort to start a man out 
right. 

Once one knows what he wishes to do, his next move will be to find 
the opening. A great variety of ways to do this present themselves. In 
many localities personal contact counts for a great deal. That is, one 
man will recommend another or one will inform another of an opening. 
For this reason, it is a good thing for everyone to state what he is looking 
for in a frank manner to those he thinks can help him. These may be 
friends of the family, friends made at college, one's college faculty, or, 
perhaps, some firm or employment bureau with which an application 
has been filed. 

Summed up in a general way, without much regard to order of great- 
est value since this is a rather difficult thing to judge, positions may be 
sought through the following channels: 



632 FARM MANAGEMENT 

(o) By inquiring of friends or acquaintances personally or by letter as to knowl- 
edge of openings, including those members of your college faculty who are personally 
acquainted with you. 

(6) By writing letters of application to firms who are constantly seeking new men. 

(c) By using the lists on file with your college or university which consist of 

1. Applications from employers for men, and 

2. Lists of students offering their services, stating experience and starting salary. 

(d) By filing an application with a reputable agency. 

(e) By watching the advertising columns of the agricultural press and daily news- 
papers for men wanted. 

(/) By advertising your services in the papers. 

Choosing the Employer. — There enters into the questions surrounding 
the obtaining or accepting of employment a need for estimating the em- 
ployer. One should beware of the type of employer who jumps from one 
hobby to another, or who follows a vacillating policy, or who fails to 
recognize the value of loyalty, or seeks immediate results, or considers 
an upheaval a preface to a change, or is a persistent fault finder, or fails 
to live up to his promises, or orders practices bordering closely upon 
dishonesty. One should seek further, and accept the employer who is 
willing and able to use to advantage such knowledge and experience as the 
applicant is able to offer, who will give a beginner or a newcomer a chance 
to prove himself, who is reasonably charitable toward ordinary or occa- 
sional mistakes, who has the opportunity and the desire to advance men 
into broader fields when promotion is justified. 

There are two especially prominent factors involved in the successful 
carrying out of any employment proposition. One is the employee, of 
whom much has been written: the other is the employer. No employer 
can reasonably be expected to entrust important operations or heavy 
investments to another without sufficient proof that his interest will be 
safeguarded in every way. But no employer should attempt or desire to 
take advantage of conscientious, hard-working, loyal employees who are 
striving to serve and protect the employer's interests. There are enough 
instances to warrant drawing attention to this and warning against 
accepting employment under faithless or over-exacting employers. 

As acquisition of farm property becomes more difficult, men will find 
in farm management an opportunity to engage in farming on a reasonably 
large scale. Some men prefer to work with other men's dollars rather 
than with their own pennies, and, as every man should do the best that 
is in him, it is sometimes entirely justifiable to forego working for one's 
self on a tiny scale and to take over duties for a corporation, cooperative 
concern, or individual with large assets. In so doing, however, the change 
in occupation should not involve less of public service or diminish a spirit 
of ambition. 

Western agriculture is today in a transitory stage. With the cutting 
up of the large holdings into smaller units, and the intensifying of a former 



THE FARM MANAGER 633 

generally extensive agriculture, openings for men are increasing. The 
opportunities, however, must be sought. There is no common 
source of information covering openings. Much of the advancing of 
men is done by personal effort. A family friend hears of an opening and 
recommends you for trial. A business man learns of you from an acquaint- 
ance of yours and suggests you for an open or pending position. 

Unless other things more than compensate, it is not always wise for 
a $5,000 man to run a $600 business — even for himself. A man should 
utilize his best resources to the fullest extent. This, however, will ordi- 
narily be best accomplished when operating one's own affairs — even 
though you may work with your own dollars rather than the other man's 
thousands. 

Application. — Let us consider the next step to be taken after you have 
found something which seems to appeal to you, and you are ready to make 
personal application. This will be done either by letter or in person, 
circumstances determining the best method to follow. If a friend of 
yours recommends you first, he will probably make an appointment at 
the time and no letter will be needed. In fact, as a general rule, a personal 
interview is so much more satisfactory that it is clearly advisable un- 
less the prospective employer insists on an application by letter, because 
he is too busy to see everyone, or else the distance is too great to warrant 
traveling expense without some assurance of securing an opening. Thus, 
each individual case must be decided by itself. 

Applying by Letter. — Considering application by letter first: formerly, 
a good deal of stress was placed upon a man's handwriting, and applica- 
tions were almost invariably sent in written by the applicant. Today, 
however, greater stress is placed on correct business methods, so that 
unless your source of information regarding a position states that your 
application should be in longhand, typewritten. Standard letter, type- 
writer paper, 8)^ by 11 in. is convenient for filing and easy to handle. 

In writing, do not attempt to give your life history, prospects, desires, 
or family affairs unless these bear directly upon the position. Leave 
something for an interview. Confine your statements to plain business 
and give only such information as will tend to bring you a hearing. 

Since your practical experience upon graduating from college will 
usually be negligible, you must approach your man from a different angle. 
Your best chance will lie along the lines of getting a trial and a chance to 
learn the details of any business. You must prove yourself worth the 
time and trouble to break you in. Your best course will then be to find a 
good firm and enter a general application, stating what branch of work 
you wish to follow up, what you have done to train yourself, and asking 
the privilege of an interview. Nine times out of ten, if a firm thinks they 
can use you either then or at some time in the future, you will be given a 
fair hearing. In this connection, it is undesirable to state salary de- 



634 FARM MANAGEMENT 

mands. Make this secondary until you prove to the firm's satisfaction, 
as well as your own, that you are really of some value. As a general rule, 
a college graduate is of mighty little value in an earning capacity — 
handling ranches — until he has been out of college 2 years. A few reach 
it sooner, while others take longer. A few never attain it. It is a curious 
fact that such great differences exist in men. An occasional man seems 
born to succeed, and no matter what business he enters brings to bear the 
right amount of energy, brain power, and tact to insure its profitable out- 
come. Another man fails properly to balance the various factors, is either 
lazy, or misdirect, his energy to such an extent that he seems to be 
always marking time — he cannot get ahead. With such a man, a change 
is sooner or later not only advisable but imminent. 

Examples of Letters of Application. — Answers to the following "ad" 
placed once in a Sunday newspaper will indicate the necessity of a clean- 
cut answer and the driving home of essential facts. 

" Wanted: man to handle 1,000 acres in San Joaquin given over to barley, 
alfalfa, dairy, hogs, and small acreage of fruit. State experience, 
salary expected and ability. Box 20,898, Oakland Examiner." 

The Results: 

Number of letters received — 76. 

Second reading given — 11 

Accorded interview, — 6 

The two best of the 76 are given below, yet these are not exceptionally 

meritorious. 

No. 45 

Marysville, Cat., Aug. 6, 1916. 
Dear Sir: 

I wish to apply for the position you advertise in the S. F. Examiner, Aug. 6. 
Have had plenty of experience in all the lines you mention, having been superintendent 
for three different companies. I can refer you to Mr. T. H. Means, S. F. Agricultural 
Engineers. Also Mr. R. L. Adams of the University of California. And T. H. 
Ramsey, Pres. of First National Bank, Red Bluff. 

I would expect a salary of $100 per month and everything furnished. 

I am acquainted with the San Joaquin valley from one end to the other. 

Am 32 years old, married and have two children. 

Have had 10 years, experience in charge of ranches. 

If you wish an interview, I will make a trip to your ranch any time. 

Yours truly, 

Aug. 7, 1916. 
Box 20,898 Examiner, 
Oakland, Calif. 
Dear Sir: 

I have noticed your advertisement in Examiner as above, and beg herewith to 
offer you my services in stated capacity, my qualifications being as follows: 

Education. — Grammar school, high school, and agricultural college. Agricultural 
training in soils, crops, animal husbandry, dairying, and horticulture, covering a 
five-year period. 



THE FARM MANAGER 635 

Experience. — Raised on a farm devoted to general products, namely, grain, alfalfa, 
hogs, and prunes. Worked out on ranches and farms in different localities. Was 
connected with the dairy on Stanford Ranch at Vina; with the E. Clemens Horst Co., 
at Los MoUnos; with Howard and Hedgers at Wrens, Oregon; and with the Sycamore 
Ranch, Los Molinos, superintending same at the present time. Have been with this 

ranch— Mrs. Mary estate of 2,200 acres — for about three years but wish for 

a change to a position paying a better salary. $100 and board and lodging is the 
value I place on my services per month. 

I am acquainted with office work and bookkeeping necessary to conducting a 
ranch successfully; handling finances, correspondence, shipping, and everything that 
enters into the business side of farming, which is just as important, if not more so, 
than the management of field work, to my mind. 

I feel capable of handling your business, which is very similar to the one I am hand- 
ling at present with barley, alfalfa, hogs, and fruit — prunes. My experience in jnilk- 
and-butter-fat-production, and training therein fits me further to your proposition. 

Trusting that we can come to some agreement, and that I can be of service to you , 
Sir, I am 

Yours very truly. 

Note that there were 76 replies from one insertion of 4-line "ad," 
hence applicant must be specij&c, give ample detail for quick decision, 
and leave decision to employer. A well-written letter, clearly legible, 
helps. 

Example of Successful Letter of Application. — The following letter, 
written by a student in the University of California, and directed to 17 
names suggested by men who knew the student resulted in 12 or 13 
answers coming back, of which six or seven were good for positions. 

His letter read: 

"At the suggestion of Professor, I am wTiting to inquire if there will be an 

opportunity for me to obtain employment with you after May next. I am at pres- 
ent a student in the University of Cahfornia, and have speciahzed in Fruit Growing. 
I will graduate next May, when I will be twenty-five years of age. 

"My practical experience has been as follows: 

"1. General Horticultural Work: Eight months, during which time I was a shed 
foreman in an asparagus packing shed and a field boss for Japanese laborers. I 
also laid out and planted a ten-acre apricot orchard, and did general horticultural 
work such as pruning, spraying, teaming, picking, and the hke. I have also done 
considerable pruning at various other times so understand this phase of the orchard 
business. I am also familiar with the common orchard pests and diseases and their 
control, and with the preparation of spray materials. 

"2. Gas Engines: I have had experience with gas engines, having worked for 
three years in a Berkeley garage while attending college. I am handy with tools, 
and can handle most repair jobs that may come up in ranch work. 

"3. Surveying: I have had fifteen months of surveying experience, and this may 
be of value to me in handhng any irrigation or orchard planting that may come up in 
orchard work. 

"4. Office Work: I have had about seven months' experience in office work for 
a lumber company, and have been a shift boss in a mill for about two months. Although 
not connected with farming, this has been good experience for me in handling men. 

"If there will be any opening, I will be glad to have you grant me an interview 



636 



FARM MANAGEMENT 




Fig. 97.— Types of letters good, bad and indifferent, written in answer to the adver- 
tisement for a farm superintendent given in the text. 



THE FARM MANAGER 637 

at your office at any time you wish, preferably on a Saturday, so I can arrange the 
trip. If you desire references, I will send you the names of the people that I have 
worked for. 

"Thanking you for any consideration that you may give this matter, I remain 

Very truly yours," 

As samples of extracts from answers, note the following: 

Letter No. 1. — You have evidently had some valuable experience preparing for the 
business of fruit growing, and if any inquiries should come to this office regarding a 
trained horticulturist, I shall gladly notify you of such. 

Letter No. 2. — Replying to yours of the 2nd, we are not in a position at this time 
to say whether we shall have anything to offer you. However, some Monday at 
your convenience, you might arrange to call on the writer at this office. Better 
telephone in advance so that you will not miss catching him. 

Letter No. 3. — Your valued favor of the 29th ult. is received, and I have carefully 
noticed your experience in different Hues of work. It is difficult for me to say at this 
time whether I can use your services or not; particularly as you do not wish to engage 
in any outside work until next May. I understand, of course, that the reason for 
this is that you will not graduate until that time. 

If you will correspond with me next April, or if you prefer, a little earlier than this, 
I may be in a position at that time to advise you whether we can use you or not. 
I consider from the practical experience you have had in different lines we could use 
your services to a good advantage. 

Letter No. 4. — In acknowledgment of yours of the 4th inst., I have to advise that 
if you will bring this matter to my attention next spring, I do not think there will be 
any difficulty in securing a position for you, the exact location of which I am not at 
present able to say, but, on account of the wide experience you have had in orchard 
work, I would consider that you would be of valuable assistance to some of our large 
shippers during the busy season. 

Letter No. 5. — If you are wilhng to commence on the ground floor in our business, 
we will give you an opportunity to work up. We could not at first put you in charge 
of any department of our work until you thoroughly understand the same, so you 
would know when the work was being done properly and when a man was doing a 
good day's work. 

Following a laboratory exercise in which students were asked to apply for a position 
through a sample advertisement, the attached letters were received. In general, 
from about forty letters the following objectionable things were noted: 

1. Two or three wrote on both sides of the paper. 

2. Several letters were too long, the writers evidently figuring the reader's time of 
no value. 

3. Some of the letters were rambling. The writers were too long coming to the 
point. Men thought on paper rather than prehminary to writing. 

4. Not a man stated that he was single. 

5. A general tendency to state what men thought they could do rather, than what 
they had done, leaving the final judgment to the advertiser. Such expressions were 
common — "I am sure that I can handle your work to your entire satisfaction;" 
"I feel that I am capable of handhng your ranch successfully," etc. 

6. A few wrote letters too short, being so abrupt as to give the impression of 
surhness. 

7. A considerable number of words were spelled wrong which would not help a 
man with an employer who must be represented in a business way — such words as 
"diarying," "experence," "advertizement," "refferences," "forman," "apUcant," 
"handeling," "salery," "posetion." 



63S FARM MASAGEMEXT 

S. Too manT used storeotTped phrases, such as — "Hopang to re^^ive a favorable 
rephr," "Hoping to heAT from you soon," *" Having seen your ad^-eTtisenlent in," 
"Thanking you in advance," ete- 

9. Too many -wrot*" general statements as to exp>erience. and in not enough detail. 
An employer would have trouble to know just how to place the man. t^ch relative 
terms appeared as "considerable exp>erience." "some experience," "quite a lot," 
'"two ye^ars' ranch experience." 

Personal Interview. — In talking over this matter of obtaining a 
situation with a student, he asked the writer — "When you do get a 
man's ear. what should you say? " — ^meaning, how should one direct the 
conversation. The answer to this is to let the other man do both talking 
and asking of questions. Confine youreelf to answers. If, at the con- 
clusion of the interview, you think you have a chance to secure a trial 
and want to know what the position is. seek only enough information 
to locate the job and then make your inquiries on the outside. Em- 
ployers are often sensitive to cross-examination, and a man may spoil 
his chances by too many detailed inquiries, although otherwise he may 
have made an agreeable impression. To my mind, two words will 
cover all one needs to bear in mind when approaching an employer for a 
position of any kind. These are inspire co77fi-d'C77-C'C. Here again your 
study of the man you are to meet, both by questioning others as to his 
traits, hkes, and dislikes and by a close quick estimate when you meet, 
will go far to determine your bearing. Some men wish full accounts, 
others condensed summaries, some men want a quiet demeanor and calm 
bearing, others a bit of bluster and "jolly." Hence the only way to 
express it is to advise you so to conduct yourseK that you inspire confi- 
dence in yotirself on the part of the man who must eventually rely upon 
you as a factor in carn'ing on his business affairs. 

And this confidence must be continued. A student once asked me — 
""How should a student use his knowledge gained here? Should he 
put it into immediate use?" Here again, it is wise to obserre the views 
of your '"boss. " If he believes in the new order of things and has hired 
you because he thinks you can successfully install them, then "go to it. " 
If, on the other hand, he is apparently satisfied with the old methods, 
you had better go pretty slow in suggesting improvements or changes. 
For one thing, you may find local conditions which necessitate the present 
order, or for certain reasons you can't utilize the best scientific teachings. 
Better to accept things as they are until by quiet trial on a small scale, 
or from exhaustive investigation, you feel that you have a better way. 
As a general rule, with most men. no decided changes should be recom- 
mended under a year's residence on the work. There are of course some 
exceptions. Another thing, be very careful of the making suggestions 
which do not actually improve. Your knowledge may show, for instance 
that the buildings are pooriy planned, but unless you are pretty sure of 



THE FARM MANAGER 639 

your ground, it wouldn't be wise to recommend their replacement in 
their entirety. But, when new buildings are to be put up, you can then 
figure on a correct ground plan. You may find, however, opportunities 
for shortening steps and Hghtening work entailing little change or expense. 
Such demonstrations will go far to prove the soundness of your ideas. 

References and Testimonials. — References and testimonials do not 
occupy very high places in the business world, although they are used to 
a certain extent. When there are no mutual acquaintances between 
employer and an applicant for a position, references are used to create a 
common basis of understanding. 

The references most valuable to a business man are those by former 
employers, by mutual friends or acquaintances, or by men having 
intimate knowledge of the applicant's work. Testimonials as to char- 
acter are worth something, but as these cover but one of the common 
requirements, too much stress must not be placed upon them. Two or 
three reliable men given as references are worth a dozen nobodies. 
Men given as references should be as prominent in business as possible. 
Teachers, ministers, friendly neighbors, and the like are not considered 
first-class references, except within certain limits. 

The reason why references are not held in very high regard is not 
far to seek. Most men believe in the inherent right of every man to 
make a living, and the reference may not feel like assuming any responsi- 
bility for keeping a man out of a job. Then other elements enter in 
giving a reference, such as sympathy for the man or his family, or a 
desire to get rid of a man easily, a belief that under different circumstances 
he might make a better showing. 

The open letter given a man is the poorest kind of reference. Far 
better is the permission given you to use a man as reference. The 
correspondence is then not only private in nature so that each man feels 
free to express a frank opinion, but the investigator can ask specific 
questions bearing directly upon the position in mind, and thus eliminate 
much of the general information conveyed in an open letter. 

Selling Ability Paramount in Business. — This covers in a fairly 
thorough manner a few suggestions regarding the securing of a position. 
There are, however, one or two additional thoughts. 

The first concerns the phases of his ability which a man should develop. 
It would seem that of all the different aspects concerned with agricultural 
confidence matters, the abihty to sell stands paramount. This can not 
stand alone of course, for without production, for instance, there would 
be nothing to sell. And further in agricultural work the methods of 
selling are fairly well defined. Most farmers are poor salesmen. And, as 
the proper disposal of a crop will go far to determine success or failure, 
the selhng end deserves much thought. In this connection, it is not so 
much a study of methods of selling as of the developing of the human 



640 FARM MANAGEMENT 

aspects so that you will be able to meet men in a manner successfully. 
A course in salesmanship is one of the biggest assets a young man can 
have, for the development of qualifications which fit a man to sell goods 
will fit him personally to "make good" in any line. It need merely be 
mentioned that a good salesman must be tactful, affable, keen, mentally 
alert, able to speak concisely and to the point; he must possess a full 
knowledge of the thing he is selling and the conditions which surround 
its acceptance and use. There is no room for jealousy, sensitiveness, 
half-information, or laggardness in good salesmanship. 

The next point is in connection with specializing. One should not 
speciahze too closely. It is well always to have a second "shot in the 
barrel." For, although this is called the "age of specialization," the 
business world is rapidly swinging around to the broadly trained man. 

Further, employers are not entirely satisfied with men trained on the 
outside as specialists. They prefer to develop their own men. This 
may be good for the employer, but it is doubtful if it is good for the 
man. Trained to do but one thing, he is then at the mercy of the firms 
who desire men of his stamp, and as he ages or marries and finds an in- 
creasing family making demands upon his income, he tends toward a 
dread of losing his job. Employers may not take advantage, but such an 
employee lives under a more or less constant fear that they may. And, 
since many business corporations are run for profit and not for humani- 
tarian ends, when a better man can be found, or a man capable of doing 
the same work for less money, family circumstances or personal needs are 
not apt to carry much weight. It's a pitiful picture, and, unfortunately, 
only too common a one. 

A last thought is that if one can make money for others, he should 
be able to make money for himself. Once one starts in on his own hook, 
he'll have the greater reward of personal independence. It can not be 
gainsaid, however, that this won't do for all men. With ability, 
but without capital, they find greater pleasure in working for some one 
other than themselves. But good positions are scarce and a man grows 
grey early in the service. As a general thing, a young man should 
start out for himself. Either choice is a hard road, but the latter leads 
to surest independence. 

Estate Administration 

Thus far, the management of estates is but a small factor in American 
agriculture. Unless involved in litigation or retained for sentimental 
reasons, American lands which can not be operated personally by some 
member of the family, by tenanting or by a manager chosen by mutual 
consent of the interested parties, are usually sold and pass on to other and 
active farmers. 

There is a small field for estate managers desiring to handle the execu- 



THE FARM MANAGER 641 

tive work of holdings reserved for hunting purposes, for country resi- 
dences, for out-of-town houses, for the consummation of some owner's 
hfe-long ambition, and sometimes, unfortunately, merely for the gratifi- 
cation of some one's passing inconsequential whim. Demands upon 
managers vary with different owners. They range from the main- 
tenance of game parks or hunting lodges, the preservation of a bit of wild 
wood or a substantial forest, the breeding and rearing of blooded stock, 
the desire to obtain fresh eggs, fruits, milk, vegetables, berries, and meat 
sufficient for the immediate family and friends. 

To make an estate pay is commonly a secondary consideration. At- 
tainment of the specific aim of the owner usually does not carry with it a 
paramount wish to make it self supporting. Funds come from sources 
other than the sale of farm products. 

To qualify successfully as an estate manager necessitates two things: 
(a) knowledge and ability to bring about the specific object for which a 
manager is hired; (6) personal capacity to please the employer and his 
guests. But while the list of requirements is short, the demands upon 
the individual are by no means slight. Some managers are expected to 
join in entertaining guests; a spirit of servility is expected of others. 
Some places offer a man-sized job; others are little better than a lackey 
position. 

Usually the right man can command a salary as estate manager some- 
what above that of the ordinary farm manager, but, to offset it, the future 
in the business is usually restricted and somewhat narrowing. 

Young men considering employment of this nature may well spend a 
little time in studying the entire situation and then go slow in arriving 
at a final decision. A brief probationary trial will often prove a very 
desirable starting point. 

Reviewing Going Concerns 

There is a growing demand for specialists able to inspect and review 
going concerns. Increasing acquisition of farm lands by non-resident 
owners for investment or for future homes, and greater control of estates 
by non-agricultural attorneys and real estate men, are creating a need 
for the kind of service a consulting farm manager can give. Work of 
this sort is sometimes handled as a side issue by progressive farm man- 
agers, and by members of many agricultural college staffs — as, for in- 
stance, the Extension Service men. 

To serve intelligently in a consultative capacity necessitates first 
of all a thorough grounding in general and local farming methods, prac- 
tices, and theories — business, agronomic, zootechnic, — obtained from 
practical experience and class room training. To this must be added 
the ability to meet men — employer and employee, to observe accurately 

41 



642 FARM MANAGEMENT 

existing conditions, and to make the necessary deductions and recom- 
mendations therefrom. 

Not all men are equipped to do this kind of work. And a few poor 
guesses or unworkable recommendations quickly destroy the chances of 
entering what otherwise could be a very profitable and legitimate field 
for specialization. 

Of all farm management work, investigating and reviewing operating 
concerns offers, to my mind, the highest possible goal. It calls (1) for 
the acquiring and exercising of a wide knowledge, (2) for incisive and 
clear powers of observation and deduction, (3) for likable personal 
qualities, and (4) for a good business sense. 

Properly qualified consulting farm managers are of real value in 
advising and directing the operation of estates, in law suits, in developing 
new agricultural projects, in reorganizing old businesses, in valuing 
farm properties, in installing proper bookkeeping systems, and in other 
ways for which their training especially fits and commends them. 

This profession is a specially attractive field because of the variety 
of work it offers. 

Consulting farm managers usually work on a per diem fee or else 
under a yearly retainer. The rate naturally varies with the reputation 
of the farm manager, the distance to the job, and its kind and size. 

Plans for 10,000 acres to be subdivided and developed properly 
call for a high degree of knowledge, the use of much time, and the employ- 
ment of additional assistance. A lawsuit often means submission to 
" bully-ragging" of lawyers and temper-provoking cross-examinations. As 
nearly as a general scale can be given, possibly the majority of consult- 
ing farm managers figure on $25 per day and expenses, a few ask and 
obtain $50, and a very few $100 or more. Rates are occasionally limited 
to $20 per day or even less. 

As such compensations may appear high, it is well to bear in mind 
that the men fitted to be good consulting farm managers are few, and as 
in the cases of the doctor or lawyer, a long period of training and 
probation is necessary before ability is attained; while occasional dull 
periods are liable to reduce very materially the annual income. 

There is really a lot of excitement resulting from going over the 
work of an incompetent foreman and straightening him out in relation to 
the peculations of his subordinates, in resurrecting a dying business, in 
turning a non-profitable business into a profitable one, in hunting leaks, 
in determining sources of profit, in reorganizing personnels, and in the 
thousand and one other things the consulting farm manager may find 
confronting him. 

In China, it is said, there are instances where doctors are paid while 
the patient is well. Payment ceases with appearance of disease. The 
reverse is true in this country. It is doubtful whether the Chinese 



THE FARM MANAGER 643 

system would work better in our country than the one we use, but it is 
probable that large savings would follow the employment of a consulting 
farm manager before starting a new agricultural project, rather than 
to wait until troubles, which usually could have been foreseen and pro- 
vided against, necessitate the calling in of a specialist. One may wonder 
if such a condition will ever come? 

Salaries 

The matter of salaries is of much interest to the prospective farm 
manager. There is no rule for determining a farm manager's salary. 
The need of the employing concern, their desire to secure some specific 
man, the size of the business, the responsibilities, the number of stock- 
holders, the degree of control by a board of directors, the penuriousness 
of the head man, the nerve of the prospective farm manager himself 
and the choice of men, all influence different businesses in different 
ways. Only a rough rule can be given. The firm usually furnishes 
a house or ample living quarters, any farm products raised such as 
vegetables, eggs, fowls, milk, butter and fruit, use of automobile or 
other vehicle, sometimes a cook, maid, or other servants, but at any rate 
good living conditions. Cash salaries for managers (not foremen) range 
fi'om $100 to $125 per month for the smaller or less responsible positions to 
$10,000 to $15,000 or more per year for positions requiring broad-gauge, 
high-caliber men. Between these extremes are all conceivable variations. 
It therefore behooves a man seeking a farm management position 
to keep in touch with every source of information that may lead to an 
opening. This is particularly true in connection with positions on 
estates run for the pleasure of the owner rather than for financial 
profit, with large subdivision outfits, and with new land and development 
investments. 

Profit Sharing for Managers. — There is increasing recognition of the 
fact that best returns follow when the man in charge is given an interest in 
the profits. Various schemes for sharing in the earnings are being tried 
out. The attempts are still in the infancy stage, and no well-defined 
plan has been, or perhaps ever can be, worked out. Some difficulty 
attends the working out of a satisfactory profit sharing scheme. But the 
idea is sound, and wherever it is being carried out in practice, under some 
plan of determining the manager's share in the responsibility for profit 
or loss, the results are gratifying. 

Bonuses. — Sometimes a flat sum is given as a bonus at the end of a 
successful season or at Christmas time. A new automobile, improvement 
of the manager's living quarters, the addition of a piano or of furniture 
for the house, a trip for pleasure and rest, etc., are other forms of bonus. 
These all savor somewhat of charity and do not prove as satisfactory as 



644 



FARM MANAGEMENT 



a predetermined schedule under the operation of which the manager 
shall definitely receive a given proportion of the earnings. Just what 
shall constitute profit is sometimes difficult to determine. Always, 
though, when a bonus plan is to be tried out, the preliminary discussion 
must be thorough and the arrangement fully understood by all parties. 
Otherwise, the question bobs up at the time of dividing earnings and 
becomes entangled in consideration of such things as interest on the 
investment, depreciation, taxes, interest on borrowed money, and losses 
due to floods, fires, hail and frost. 

Utilization of Salary. — In connection with salaries, a study by Mann- 
ingi54 into the living cost of city families averaging two adults and two 
children is of interest. He found the division of income, based on the 
amount, should be as scheduled : 







T 


ABLE 


247.— 


Proration 


OF Family Incom 


ES 






Yearly 
Income 


Food 


Shelter 


Clothes 


Operating 
expenses 


Advance- 
ment 


Insurance and 
savings 




A- 


Per- 


A- 


Per- 


A- 


Per- 


A- 


Per- 


A- 


Per- 


A- 


Per- 




mount 


cent 


mount 


cent 


mount 


cent 


mount 


cent 


mount 


cent 


mount 


cent 


$1,200 


$330 


27.5 


$300 


25 


$150 


12.5 


$150 


12.5 


$100 


8.3 


$170 


14.2 


2,500 


500 


20.0 


400 


16 


250 


10.0 


450 


18.0 


450 


18.0 


450 


18.0 


4,000 


675 


16.9 


600 


15 


500 


12.5 


625 


15.6 


600 


15.0 


1,000 


25.0' 



The headings cover: 

Food: Groceries, meat and fish, man's lunches. 

Operating Expenses: Servant's wages, telephone, laundry, fuel and ice, light, 
household equipment, fire insurance, incidentals, carfare. 

Rent: Rent, taxes, interest on mortgages, repairs and upkeep. 

Clothes: Anything to wear. 

Advancement: Charity, tuition, books and magazines, vacations, music, travel, 
social clubs, amusements, lectures, doctor bills, medicine, gifts, automobile, loans. 

Insurance and savings: Investments, savings, life insurance, accident insurance, 
health insurance, mortgage payments. 

For families with more than two children, the item "Insurance and 
Savings" will be diminished somewhat; the items "Food," "Clothes,"* 
and "Operating Expenses" being correspondingly increased. Where 
there are no children or fewer than two, the item "Insurance and 
Savings" should be increased proportionally. Children up to 12 years 
are usually considered about six-tenths of one adult; those over 18 an 
adult. 



THE FARM MANAGER 645 

IN CONCLUSION 

Recognition that farming is a business is not new in many sections 
where farm management principles are not only well understood but have 
long been actively employed by farmers and producers in carrying for- 
ward their agriculture. The most successful farmers — be they engaged 
in horticulture, in stock raising, in crop production — are primarily busi- 
ness men. The more prosperous producers early learned the need of 
business methods if they are successfully to enter distant markets, obtain 
necessary labor, insure satisfactory transportation, protect themselves 
from foreign competition, and successfully carry crop forward from time of 
planting to harvest — efforts which often have to be expended over a long 
period of years, particularly in the fruit industries. 

Men who handle their farming operations primarily as a business are 
obliged to keep constantly abreast of the times; a few — the most suc- 
cessful—must keep several paces ahead, since, as in any business, the 
problems of tomorrow usually tend to be somewhat different from the 
problems of today. Farm managers, therefore, still have big tasks ahead 
of them which must be worked out either by individual effort or in con- 
junction with state and federal departments. They are facing such 
momentous issues as the necessity for the maintenance, and often for the 
increase, of the crop producing power of the land, whether this be by 
addition of plant foods, incorporation of organic matter, provision for 
irrigation or drainage, leveling, removal of alkali, neutralizing acid 
condition, or by the recognition and combating of pests within and 
without the state boundaries — insect, fungus, rodent, and weed. 

They must help in working out such questions as: 

1. A better knowledge of costs of production to justify price fixing, if prices can 
successfully be fixed except through the traditional give and take of the market, and 
to educate consumer and producer. This means, as a corollary, more extensive use 
of farm bookkeeping. 

2. A determination of how far tenanting of farm lands should be promoted and 
whether in such tenancy a place can be found for the growing generation to obtain a 
foothold in farming and a start toward ownership and independence. 

3. A stabilizing of the farm labor supply. This is important to indicate what 
direction future agricultural investments should take. 

4. Sound means for financing young men who desire, and are qualified, to enter 
into farm enterprises. 

5. Reduction of speculation in farm lands and a means for fairly valuing farm 
enterprises. 

6. Absorption, amalgamation, or exclusion of foreigners so that these United 
States may be a nation of real homes, productive of sturdy, patriotic citizens. 

7. Improved methods of transportation and marketing. 

As time goes on, there will be new problems to solve, new conditions 
to sustain or reject, new methods to incorporate, because American agri- 



646 FARM MANAGEMENT 

culture is in a mobile state and today's matters which are under discus- 
sion or under way may be materially different from those of tomorrow. 
It is the duty of the true farm manager to keep abreast of the topics 
of the day and to lend his influence and effort toward bringing about 
the best possible agriculture in its relation to Nation, State, community, 
family, and individual. Verily, the higher one goes up the agricultural 
ladder, the more responsibility he will meet and should accept. 



CHAPTER XXVII 

INDEX TO REFERENCES 

References are given in order of use throughout the text. Chapter 
headings preface the hst of references applying therein. This method 
automatically results in a partial bibliography of reference matter. 

Chapter 1 
General Considerations of Farm Management 

1. Washington Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 123, "Time and Method of Tillage on 
the Yield and Comparative Cost of Production of Wheat in the Palouse Region of 
Eastern Washington," C. C. Thorn and H. F. Holtz, July, 1915. 

2. Texas Exp. Sta., Bulletin 182, "Steer Feeding," John C. Burns, Nov., 1915. 

3. Univ. of Nebraska, Research Bulletin 10, "Spraying Experiments in Nebraska," 
J. Ralph Cooper, April 10, 1917. 

Chapter 2 

Selecting Farming as an Occupation 

4. "Country Gentleman," June 22, 1918. 

Chapter 3 
Selecting the Farm Business 

5. "Farm Management Notes," California conditions, R. L. Adams, 1921. 

6. This material was prepared for the author in February, 1919, by Mr. H. A. 
Miller of the U. S. D. A. OfBce of Farm Management, aided by various field men of 
the same office. 

7. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Professional Paper 341, "Farm 
Management Practice of Chester County, Pa.," W. J. Spillman, H. M. Dixon and 
G. A. BilUngs, January 17, 1916. 

8. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 761, "Management of Muck-land Farms in 
Northern Indiana and Southern Michigan," H. R. Smalley, May, 1918. 

9. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 659, "A Farm Management 
Study of Cotton Farms of Ellis County, Texas," Rex E. Willard, June 17, 1918. 

10. These three paragraphs, somewhat revised, are from U. S. D. A., Bureau of 
Plant Industry, Bulletin 259, "What is Farm Management?" W. J. Spillman, 1912. 

Chapter 4 
Selecting the Farm 

11. For further detail and guidance, the student may well consult "Choosing a 
Farm" by Thomas F. Hunt, published 1911 by the Macmillan Co. of New York. 
A portion of the material given here has been taken from this book. 

647 



648 FARM MANAGEMENT 

12. Largely taken from U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 745, "Waste Land and 
Wasted Land on Farms," James S. Ball, Aug., 1916. 

13. A part of the material in this chapter is from U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 
1088, "Selecting a Farm," E. H. Thomson, March, 1920. This applies particularly 
to the paragraphs — Topography and Soil, Arrangement of Farm, and Water Supply. 

14. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 1000, "Crop Systems for Arkansas," A. D. 
McNair, Aug., 1918. 

15. Manuscript copy of "The California Irrigated Farm Problem," H. T. Cory. 
Appendix, quoting F. H. Newell. 

16. Univ. of CaUfornia, College of Agric, Study by the Dept. of Farm Manage- 
ment, Summer of 1916. Reported in Commonwealth Club of San Francisco report, 
"Land Settlement in California," Vol. XII, No. 1. 

17. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 1088, "Selecting a Farm," E. H. Thomson, 
March, 1920. 

Chapter 6 

Organizing the Farm Business 

18. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Professional Paper 492, "An 
Economic Study of Farming in Sumter County, Ga.," H. M. Dixon and H. W. Haw- 
thorne, Feb., 1917.. 

19. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 694, "A Study of Farm 
Management Problems in Lenawee County, Mich.," H. M. Dixon and J. A. Drake, 
July, 1918. 

20. U. S. D. A., Bureau of Plant Industry, Bulletin 117, "Profits in Farming on 
Irrigated Areas in Utah Lake Valley," E. H. Thomson and H. M. Dixon, July, 1914. 

21. U. S. D. A., Bureau of Plant Industry, Bulletin 41, "A Farm Management 
Survey of Three Representative Areas in Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa," E. H. Thomson 
and H. M. Dixon, Jan., 1914. 

22. Texas Extention Bulletin B-46, Oct., 1918. 

23. Ohio Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 227, "A Study of Farm Equipment," L. W. 
Ellis, Feb., 1911. 

24. "Wallace's Farmer," 45, H. B. Munger, 1920. 

25. West Virginia Exp. Sta., Bulletin 173, "A Two Year Farm Management 
Survey of Greenbrier and Monroe Counties," A. J. Dadisman and C. F. Sarle, Feb., 
1920. 

26. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 648, "A Farm Management 
Survey in Brooks Co., Ga.," E. S. Haskell, May, 1918. 

27. University of Nebraska, Bulletin 157, "Farm Management Studies in Eastern 
Nebraska," H. C. Filley, Oct., 1916. 

28. University of Missouri, Bulletin 121, "Land Tenure," O. R. Johnson and 
W. E. Foord, Dec, 1914. 

29. Prepared by C. M. Titus, University of California, under direction of the 
author: California conditions, 1918. 

30. Utah Agric. College Exp. Sta., Bulletin 165, "Labor Costs and Seasonal 
Distribution of Labor on Irrigated Crops in Utah Valley," L. G. Connor, Oct., 1918. 

31. Data from (a) U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management pubUcations, espe- 
cially Department Bulletin 528, "Seasonal Distribution of Farm Labor in Chester 
County, Pa.," G. A. Billings, Apr., 1917, and (b) West Virginia Exp. Sta., Bulletin 
163, "Amounts and Costs of Labor Required for Growing Crops in West Virginia," 
O. M. Johnson and A. J. Dadisman, Nov., 1916. 

32. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 1015, "Producing Family and Farm Supplies 
on the Cotton Farm," C. L. Goodrich, Jan., 1919. 



INDEX TO REFERENCES 649 

33. Kentucky Agric. Exp. Sta., Circular 14, "The Home Garden in Kentucky," 
C. S. Adams, March, 1917. 

34. R. H. Taylor, then Assistant Professor in Pomology in the University of 
California, in a personal letter to the author. 

Chapter 6 
The Soil Factor 

35. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 986, "Farm Practices that Increase Crop Yields 
the Gulf Coast Region," M. A. Crosby, June, 1918. 

36. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 716, "Management of Sandy-land Farms in 
Northern Indiana and Southern Michigan," J. A. Drake, June, 1916. 

37. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 924, "A Simple Way to Increase Crop Yields" 
(Methods of Coastal Plain Section of Central Atlantic States), H. A. Miller, Feb., 
1918. 

38. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 981, "Farm Practices that Increase Crop 
Yields in Kentucky and Tennessee," J. H. Arnold, Nov., 1918. 

39. For the information constituting the basis for these paragraphs, credit is 
due to: — J. H. Arnold, G. A. Bilhngs, F. H. Branch, D. A. Brodie, Levi Chubbuck, 
R. W. Clothier, M. A. Crosby, J. A. Drake, Byron Hunter, S. O. Jayne, H. A. Miller, 
H. H. Mowry, A. G. Smith, and R. N. Thompson, of the Federal Office of Farm 
Management, Feb., 1919. 

Chapter 7 

The Calendar of Operations 

40. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 528, "Seasonal Distribution 
of Farm Labor in Chester Co., Pa.," George A. Bilhngs, April, 1917. 

41. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 654, "Farm Organization 
in the Irrigated Valleys of Southern Arizona," R. W. Clothier, June, 1918. 

42. Chart of U. S. D. A., Office from Farm Management, Bulletin 528, see reference 
31. 

43. U. S. D. A., Yearbook, "A Graphic Summary of Seasonal Work on Farm 
Crops," O. E. Baker, C. F. Brooks and R. G. Hainsworth, 1917. 

44. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 985, "Systems of Hog Farming in the South- 
eastern States," E. S. Haskell, June, 1918. 

Chapter 8 
Choice of Farm Equipment 

45. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Professional Paper 423, "Labor 
Requirements of Dairy Farms as Influenced by Milking Machines," H. N. Humphrey, 
Nov., 1916. 

Chapter 9 

Building Equipment 

46. Kentucky Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 179, "Construction and Equipment of 
Dairy Barns," W. D. Nicholls, June, 1914. 

47. Texas Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 210, "Barns for Work Animals," B. Young- 
blood, Jan., 1917. 

48. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 126, "Practical Suggestions for Farm Buildings," 
George G. Hill, Feb., 1901. 



650 . FARM MANAGEMENT 

49. Two publications used in this connection are Farmers' Bulletin 1121, "Factors 
that Make for Success in Farming in the South," C. L. Goodrick, Sept., 1920, and 
Farmers' Bulletin 1132, "Planning the Farmstead," M. C. Betts and W. R. Hum- 
phries, of the Division of Rural Engineering, Bureau of Public Roads, Aug., 1920. 

50. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 1087, "Beautifying the Farmstead," F. L. 
Mulford, March, 1920. 

51. This section from Farmers' Bulletin 1,132, see 49 above. 

Chapter 10 

Fencing, Work Stock, Implements and Machinery 

52. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 321, "Cost of Fencing Farms in the North Cen- 
tral States," H. N. Humphrey, Jan., 1916. 

53. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 816, "Minor Articles of Farm Equipment," 
H. N. Humphrey and A. P. Yerkes, May, 1917. 

54. Michigan Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 277, "Studies in the Cost of Market 
Milk Production," A. C. Anderson and F. T. Riddell, Dec, 1916. 

55. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Professional Paper 501, "A Study 
in the Cost of Producing Milk on Four Dairy Farms, Located in Wisconsin, Michigan, 
Pennsylvania, and North Carolina," M. O. Cooper, C. M. Bennett, L. M. Church, 
Feb., 1917. 

56. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin .500, "The Cost of Producing 
Apples in Western Colorado," S. M. Thomson and G. H. Miller, March, 1917. 

57. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 518, "The Cost of Producing 
Apples in Hood River Valley," S. M. Thomson and G. H. Miller, March, 1917. 

58. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 614, "Cost of Producing 
Apples in Yakima Valley, Washington," G. H. Miller and S. M. Thomson, April, 
1918. 

59. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 636, "Cost of Production 
of Apples in the Payette Valley, Idaho," S. M. Thomson and G. H. Miller, May, 
1918. 

Chapter 11 
The Capital Requirements of Farming 

60. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 582, "Farm Management 
and Farm Profits on Irrigated Farms in the Provo Area (Utah)," L. G. Connor, Jan., 
1918. 

61. From U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletins 446, 500, 518, 614, 
638. Bulletin 446 is "The Cost of Producing Apples in Wenatchee Valley, Wash- 
ington," G. H. Miller and S. M. Thomson, Jan., 1917. For descriptions of other 
bulletins see references: 

Bulletin 500 — See reference 56 
Bulletin 518 — See reference 57 
Bulletin 614 — See reference 58 
Bulletin 636 — See reference 59 

62. U. S. D. A., Office of Markets and Rural Organization, Bulletin 384, "Costs 
and Sources of Farm-mortgage Loans in the United States," C. W. Thompson, 1916. 

63. U. S. D. A., Bulletin 593, "How to Use Farm Credit," T. N. Carver, June 
3, 1914. 

64. U. S. D. A., Office of Markets and Rural Organization, Circular 60, "Amorti- 
zation Methods for Farm Mortgage Loans," L. E. Truesdell, July, 1914. 



INDEX TO REFERENCES 651 

Chapter 12 

Farm Profits 

65. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Professional Paper 716, "A Five 
Year Farm Management Survey in Palmer Township, Washington County, Ohio, 
1912-1916," H. W. Hawthorne, Sept. 1918. 

66. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Professional Paper 713, "A Study 
of Farming in Southwestern Kentucky," J. H. Arnold, Oct., 1918. 

67. Utah Agric. College, Bulletin 160, "Important Factors in the Operation of 
Irrigated Utah Farms," E. B. Brossard, Sept., 1917. 

68.- University of Minnesota, Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 162, "The Cost of Living 
on Minnesota Farms, 1905-1914," F. W. Peck, Aug., 1916. 

69. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 635, "What the Farm Con- 
tributes Directly to the Farmer's Living," W. C. Funk, Dec, 1914, and Professional 
Paper 410, "Value to Farm FamiHes of Food, Fuel and Use of House," W. C. Funk, 
1916. 

Chapter 13 

Factors Affecting Profits 

70. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 425, "Farming on the 
Cut-over Lands of Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota," J. C. McDowell and 
W. B. Walker, Oct., 1916. 

71. Cornell University, Bulletin 295, "An Agricultural Survey. Townships 
of Ithaca, Dryden, Danby, and Lansing, Tompkins Co., N. Y.," G. F. Warren and 
K. C. Livermore, assisted by C. M. Bennett, H. N. Kutschbach, E. H. Thomson, 

F. E. Robertson, E. L. Baker, March, 1911. 

72. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 1139, "A Method of Analyzing the Farm 
Business," H. M. Dixon and H. W. Hawthorne, June, 1920. 

73. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 482, "Farming in the Blue- 
grass Region (of Kentucky)," J. H. Arnold and Frank Montgomery, Feb., 1917. 

74. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 651, "A Farm Management 
Study in Anderson County, South Carolina," A. G. Smith, May, 1918. 

75. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 705, "Profitable Manage- 
ment of General Farms in the Willamette Valley, Oregon," Byron Hunter and 
S. O. Jayne, July, 1918. 

76. Averaged from U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 425. See 
reference 70. 

(No references in Chapter 14). 

Chapter 15 
Farm Management Surveys 

77. Cornell University, Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 344, "Agricultural Surveys," 

G. F. Warren, April, 1914. 

78. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Professional Paper 529, "Validity 
of the Survey Method of Research," W. J. Spillmaq, April, 1917. 

Chapter 16 

Farm Bookkeeping 

79. "Farm Management," G. F. Warren, published by Macmillan Co., 1913. 

80. "Farm Management," Andrew Boss, published by Lyons and Carnahan, 1914. 



652 FARM MANAGEMENT 

81. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 511, "Farm Bookkeeping." Originally written 
by Edward H. Thomson, Oct., 1912. Revised by J. S. Ball, June, 1920. 

82. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 572, "A System of Farm Cost Accounting," 
C. E. Ladd, March, 1914. Revised by J. S. Ball, March, 1920. 

83. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 782, "The Use of a Diary for Farm Accounts," 
E. H. Thomson, Jan., 1917. Revised by O. A. Juve, 1920. 

84. U. S. D. A., Yearbook, Office of Farm Management, "Value of Records to the 
Farmer," J. S. BaU, 1917. 

85. Oregon Agric. College, Oregon Agricultural Press, "The Business Side of 
Farming — Part 1 — Farm Records," J. A. Bexell, 1911. 

86. Montana Agric. College, Circular 43, "Farm Records and Accounts," E. L. 
Currier, Feb., 1915. 

87. University of Missouri, Circular 84, "How to Keep Farm Accounts," R. M. 
Green and D. C. Wood, April, 1918. 

88. Largely from Farmers' Bulletin 1139. See reference 72. 

89. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 1182, "Farm Inventories," J. S. Ball, Dec, 
1920. 

Chapter 17 

Farm Cost Accounting 

90. Generous extracts have been made from U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 572. 
See reference 82. 

Chapter 18 

Costs of Producing Crops 

91. Committee consisted of Dr. J. I. Falconer, Ohio State University, Dr. H. C. 
Taylor, University of Wisconsin, Dr. G. F. Warren, Cornell University, Professor 
Andrew Boss, University of Minnesota, Professor J. A. Foord, Massachusetts Agri- 
culture College, Professor R. L. Adams, University of California, G. I. Christie, 
Nat C. Murray, C. W. Thompson, E. H. Thomson, and other representatives of the 
U. S. D. A. 

92. Largely from U. S. D. A., Office of Secretary, Circular 132, "Report of Com- 
mittee to Consider Plan of Organization, Scope of Work, and Projects for the Office 
of Farm Management, and Methods of Procedure in Making Cost of Production 
Studies," March, 1919. 

93. University of Nebraska, Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 122, "Cost of Growing 
Crops in Nebraska," C. W. Pugsley,' June 30, 1911. 

94. Results by Edward C. Parker and Thomas P. Cooper, published as U. S. D. A., 
Bureau of Statistics, Bulletin 73, "The Cost of Producing Minnesota Farm Products, 
1902-1907," 1909. 

95. University of Missouri, Bulletin 165, "Cost of Producing Some Missouri 
Farm Crops," O. R. Johnson and R. M. Green, Aug., 1919. 

96. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management and Farm Economics, Bulletin 896, 
"The Cost of Producing Cotton— 842 Records, 1918," L. A. Moorhouse and M. R. 
Cooper, Nov., 1920. 

97. This material is from mimeographed "Farm Management Notes," University 
of Cahfornia, R. L. Adams. 

98. Reported in Purdue University, Bulletin 194, "The Indiana Farm Orchard — 
Operating Costs and Methods," C. G. Woodbury, M. W. Richards, and H. J. Reed, 
Sept., 1916. 

99. U. S. D. A., Bureau of Plant Industry, Bulletin 29, "Crew Work, Costs, and 
Returns in Commercial Orcharding in West Virginia," J. H. Arnold, Nov., 1913- 



INDEX TO REFERENCES 653 

100. University of California, College of Agric, Circular 130, "Cabbage Growing 
in California," S. S. Rogers, June, 1915. 

101. University of California, College of Agriculture, Circular 147, "Tomato 
Growing in. California," S. S. Rogers, Feb., 1916. 

102. University of California, College of Agriculture, Circular 160, "Lettuce 
Growing in California," S. S. Rogers, March, 1917. 

103. University of California, College of Agriculture, unnumbered circular, 
"Spinach Growing in California," S. S. Rogers, February, 1918. 

104. University of California, College of Agriculture, Circular 199, "Onion Grow- 
ing in California," S. S. Rogers, May, 1918. 

Chapter 19 
Costs of Producing Stock and Stock Products: Miscellaneous Costs 

105. The material is a part of an exhaustive presentation of the complete data 
which form a 183-page pubUcation put out under date of December, 1919 by the 
Federal Trade Commission in its "Report on the Meat-packing Industry: Part VI," 
printed by the Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. (1920). The pamph- 
let gives the* details (1st) of a three-year study of the cost of producing calves and 
yearUngs in the corn belt states, and the cost of producing beef animals on twelve 
western ranches; (2nd) 3 studies of costs of fattening and finishing cattle on corn-belt 
farms; and (3rd) cost of marketing live stock. The pubHcation, which is illustrated, 
gives in detail the findings of trained investigators from the federal Office of Farm 
Management, the Bureau of Animal Industry, and the Bureau of Markets who were 
detailed to make these specific studies. 

106. Ohio Experiment Station, Bulletin 289, "Raising Dairy Heifers," C. C. 
Hayden, August, 1915. 

107. Purdue University, Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 214, "Cost of Raising White 
Plymouth Rocks," A. G. Phillips, April, 1918. 

108. Michigan Agric. College, Bulletin 286, "Studies in the Cost of Milk Pro- 
duction, No. 2," F. T. Riddell and A. C. Anderson, Jan., 1920. 

109. Vermont Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 209, "The Cost of Producing Market 
Milk in 1916-17 on 212 Vermont Farms," G. F. E. Story and W. J. Tubbs, Sept., 1917. 

110. Minnesota Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 173, "The Cost of Milk Production," 
F. W. Peck and Andrew Boss, Feb., 1918. 

111. Missouri Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 156, "Milk Production Costs and Milk 
Prices," R. M. Green, D. C. Wood and A. C. Ragsdale, July, 1918. 

112. New Hampshire Exp. Sta. Extension Bulletin 2, "Cost of Milk Production," 
Fred Rasmussen, June, 1913. 

113. Ma.ssachusetts Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 145, "Record of the Station Dairy 
Herd and the Cost of Milk Production," J. B. Lindsey, Sept., 1913. 

114. Connecticut (Stoors) Exp. Sta., Bulletin 73, "Records of a Dairy Herd for 
Five Years," J. M. Trueman, June, 1912. 

115. Reported in Cornell University, Bulletin 377, "Cost Accounts on Some 
New York Farms," C. E. Ladd, June, 1916. 

116. U. S. D. A., Dairy Division, Dept. Bulletin 858, "Requirements and Cost 
of Producing Market Milk in Northwestern Indiana," J. B. Bain and R. J. Posson, 
July, 1920. 

117. University of Illinois, Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 224, "The Seasonal Co.st of 
Milk Production," F. A. Pearson, Dec, 1919. 

118. Cornell University, Lesson 142 of Farm Management Series in "The Cornell 
Reading Course for the Farm," E. G. Misner, Feb., 1919. 



654 FARM MANAGEMENT 

119. U. S. D. A., Bureau of Plant Industry, Bulletin 91, "Cost and Methods of 
Clearing Land in the Lake States," Harry Thompson and Earl D. Strait, May, 1914. 

120. Ohio Agric. Exp. Sta., Circular 147, "The Cost of Tile Drainage," L. H. 
Goddard and H. O. Tiffany, Sept., 1914. 

121. Missouri Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 152, "Cost of Horse Labor on the Farm," 
O. R. Johnson and R. M. Green, March, 1918. 

122. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 560, "Cost of Keeping 
Horses and Cost of Horse Labor," M. R. Cooper, July, 1917. 

123. Ohio Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 266, "Labor Cost of Producing Corn in Ohio," 
L. H. Goddard and W. L. Elser, Dec, 1914. 

124. Colorado Agric. Exp. Station, Bulletin 203, "Farm Costs on the Colorado 
Agricultural College Farm," Alvin Keyser, Dec, 1914. 

125. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 338, "Machinery Cost of 
Farm Operations in Western New York," H. H. Mowry, Jan., 1916. 

126. U. S. D. A., Bureau of Statistics, Bulletin 49, "Costs of Hauhng Crops from 
Farms and Shipping Points," Frank Andrews, Feb., 1907. 

Chapter 20 

Marketing Farm Products 

127. From U. S. D. A., Year book, 1917. 

128. From U. S. D. A., "The Market Reporter," July 10, 1920. 

129. From manuscript by Mr. Scott B. Harrington, student in the University of 
California, Dec, 1920. 

130. Prepared for the author by Mr. H. C. Filley of the University of Nebraska, 
December 15, 1920. 

131. Prepared for the author by Mr. Cap E. Miller of North Dakota Agricultural 
College, December 15, 1920. 

132. Prepared by the University of Illinois, Department of Farm Organization 
and Management, Feb. 1, 1921. 

133. As used in "Wallace's Farmer," 1920. 

134. Article in "Pacific Rural Press," Albert Lindley, Oct. 4, 1919. 

135. U. S. D. A., Bureau of Markets, Document 1, "Work of the Office of Markets 
and Rural Organization," Charles J. Brand, July, 1915. 

136. CaHfornia Exp. Sta., Circular 193, "A Study of Farm Labor in California," 
R. L. Adams and T. R. Kelley, March, 1918. 

137. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletin 635, "What the Farm Contributes Directly 
to the Farmer's Living," W. C. Funk, Dec 24, 1914. 

138. U. S. D. A., "Monthly Crop Reporter," Dec, 1919. 

139. U. S. D. A., Bureau of Statistics. 

140. U. S. D. A., "Crop Reporter," Mar., 1911, Mar., 1913, and Dec, 1919. 

141. U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bulletins 987, 989, 1008. Farmers' Bulletin 987 is 
entitled "Labor Saving Practices in Hay Making." It is by H. B. McClure, June, 
1918. Farmers' Bulletin 989 is "Better Uses of Man Power on the Farm," by W. J. 
Spillman, June, 1918. Farmers' Bulletin 1008 is "Saving Farm Labor by Harvesting 
Crops with Livestock," by J. A. Drake, Dec. 1918. 

Chapters 23 and 24 
Farm Tenancy 

142. U. S. D. A., Yearbook, "Farm Tenantry in the United States," W. J. Spillman 
and E. A. Goldenweiser, 1916. 

143. Introductory paragraphs from Farmers' Bulletin 1164, "The Farm Lease 
Contract," L. C. Gray and H. A. Turner, Oct., 1920. 



INDEX TO REFERENCES 655 

144. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 650, "Lease Contracts 
Used in Renting Land on Shares," E. V. Wilcox, Feb., 1918. 

145. Taken from U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Bulletin 603, "A 
Stud}^ of Share-rented Dairy Farms in Green County, Wisconsin, and Kane County, 
Illinois," E. A. Boeger, April, 1918. 

146. U. S. D. A., Office of Farm Management, Professional Paper 337, "The 
Study of the Tenant Systems of Farming in the Yazoo-Mississippi Delta," E. A. 
Boeger and E. A. Goldenweiser, Jan. 13, 1916. 

147. Largely from Farmers' Bulletin 1164. See reference 143. 

148. University of Minnesota, Bulletin 178, "Farm Tenancy and Leases," 
A. H. Benton, Dec, 1918. 

149. Missouri Agric. Exp. Sta., Bulletin 167, "Renting Lands in Missouri," O. R. 
Johnson and R. M. Green, Feb., 1920. 

150. University of Wisconsin, Research Bulletin 47, "Farm Leasing Systems in 
Wisconsin," B. H. Hubbard and J. D. Black, Oct., 1920. 

Chapter 25 

Farm Law 

151. "Law for the American Farmer,". John B. Green, Macmillan Company, 
1912. The section "Conceptions of the Law" is largely from this book. 

152. The author is indebted for help in formulating ideas of constructive farmer 
legislation to the. following: 

Professor H. C. Filley, University of Nebraska. 

Professor Frank App, New Jersey Experiment Station. 

Professor O. R. Johnson, L^niversity of Missouri. 

Professor Andrew Boss, University of Minnesota. 

Professor G. E. Thompson, University of Arizona. 

Professor H. E. Babcock, Cornell University. 

Doctor C. L. Goodrich, Federal Office of Farm Management and Farm Economics. 

Chapter 26 

The Farm Manager 

153. Professor H. E. Van Norman, Dean of the University of California Farm 
School, Davis, Cahfornia. 

154. Extracted from "The Living Cost," Earl G. Manning. 



INDEX 



Abstract of title, example, 80, 81 

Agricultural economics, compared with farm 

management, 3 
Alabama, cotton costs, 422, 423 
crop rotations in use, 132 
crop rotations recommended, 127 
use of fertilizers, 136 
Alfalfa, carload, 496 

cost, California, 428 
day's work, 549 
detailed cost, California, 427 
method of growing, Pennsylvania, 143 
method of growing and data, California, 144 
Almond, California yields and costs, 432 
Amortization, method, 252 
Annual statement, description, 368 
example, 369 
making, 370, 371 
Annual summary, graphic outline, 343 
Apple orchards, capital requirements, 241 
Apples, amount of consumers' dollar received by 
farmers, 511 
carload, 494, 495 
costs, 428, 429 

California yields and costs, 432 
Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, 

428, 429 
Indiana, 430 
New York, 428, 429 
day's work, 553 
equipment costs, 214 
leasing orchards, 569 
size of loads, 468 
Application for a position, 633 
Apricots, California yields and costs, 432 
carload, 494 
day's work, 553 
Arizona, capital needs, 239, 240 
capital of tenants, 245 
family living, 266 
farm management survey, 328 
income and capital, 284 
income and live stock, 293 
income and size of farm, 279 
labor incomes, 261, 262, 265 
state legislation, 620 
use of green manures, 139 
Arkansas, crop rotations for, 126 
size of farm, 72 
work days, 145 
Asparagus, cost, California, 428 
day's work, 554 



B 



Baling, day's work, 549 
Banks, advantages, 250 

as sources of capital. 246-248 
42 



Banks, use, 250 

using credit, 250, 251 
Barley, carload, 496 

cost, California, 428 

Minnesota, 414 
day's work, 551 
. size of loads, 468 

Beans, carload, 494 

cost, California, 428 
day's work, 550, 551 
leasing lands, 570 
size of loads, 468 
Beef, California cost data, 446 
Berries, day's work 553 
Bibliography, list of farm management surveys, 

326-334 
Bill of materials, definitions, 166 
making, 166 
examples, 166 
dairy barn, 166-169 
horse barn, 170-171 
Board, student findings, 528 
adverse comments, 529 
suggestions in boarding men, 531-537 
examples of supplies, 533-535 
costs, 535-537 
value of, 541 
Bookkeeping (see Farm Bookkeeping). 
Broker, 473 

Building equipment, bill of materials, 166 
construction suggestions, 164-166 
determined for general farm, 203-204 

costs, 210 
for profit making, 163 
good and bad, 163 
plans, 172 

procedure in building, 164 
proposed, 164 
regional variation, 161 
examples, 161 
Buildings (also see Building Equipment^ con- 
struction suggestions, 164, 166 
costs materials, 217, 218 
costs, Ohio, 213 

day's work constructing, 556, 557 
for selected business, 200, 205 

costs, 208-212 
grouping in farmstead, 179 
justifying purchase, 155 
plans, 172 

space allotment, 174 

spacing, 180 

Bureau of crop estimates, 500 

publications, 498-500 

example, 499-500 

Bureau of markets, monthly report, 500-501 

publications, 514-516 

statement of effect of export upon prices, 
471-472 
Butter, carload, 495 



657 



658 



INDEX 



Butter, imports and exports, 470 

Buying and selling farm lands, abstract of title, 80 

certificate of title, 82 

deed, 83 

selling contracts, 84 



Cabbage, California costs, 433, 434 
day's work, 554 
leasing lands, 570 
Calendar of operations, definition, 142 
graphic presentations, 140 

block, 149 

chart, 146 

example, 147 

example to provide feed, 150-151 

line, 147 

example, 148 
use in determining implement and machinery 
needs, 195 
California, acreage for given income, 69, 70 
alfalfa, costs, 427, 428 

growing methods, 144 
beef industry. 446 
cabbage, 433, 434 
capital needs, 242-243, 246 
as tenant, 245 

of tenants, 245 
citrus yields and costs, 432. 433 
crop rotations in use, 135 
dairy industry, 445 
depreciation, 361, 362 
equipment costs, 243 
farm, expenses, 242-244 

management surveys, 333 

profits, 265 
field crops, yields and costs, 428 
fruit, standards, 621 

yields and costs, 431-432 
horse depreciation, 362 
incomes from crops, 263, 265 
labor requirements, cotton and strawberries, 

102-103 
Market Commission Act. 621 
market containers, 480 
marketing oranges, 480 
peach growing methods, 144 
poultry industry, 444 
reducing labor needs, 100 
sheep industry, 447 
size, citrus groves, 72 

of farms, 73 
State Compensation Act, 623 
state legislation, 621- 623 
swine industry, 448 
truck crop yields and costs, 433 
use of fertilizers, 138 
use of green manures, 139 
value perquisites, 271 
Calves, carload, 496 

data of costs, 436, 437, 440 
. method of figuring costs, 435 
Cantaloupes, carload, 494 
day's work, 555 



Cantaloupes, leasing lands, 570 
Capital, by irrigation farmers, 241, 242 

cash and credit, 223 

determining needs, 224, 22.5 

effect of buisness upon, 246 

estimating and grouping needs, 225 

farm, 13 

fixed, 13 

for apple orchards, 241 

in California farming, 242, 243, 246 

in determining type of business, 32 

in selecting the farm, 64 

in tenant farming, California, 245 

in tenant farming, survey data, 244 

planning to provide, 92 
example, 92 

required as owner from surveys, 239-240 

required as owner, Ohio, 240 

safety factor, 228 

shown by expenses, 232-238 

sources, 246-249 

tabulating, 227 

example, 229-231, 232 
Carload lots, 493-496 
Cash book, 362 

description, 362 

diary form, 365-368 
examples, 366, 367 

examples, 363, 364 

in cost accounting, 376 

use of bankbook, 365 
Cash rent, 562 
Cattle, costs of fattening, Illinois, 438 

costs of raising, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, 
Kansas, 436 
Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Iowa, Miss- 
ouri, South Dakota, 437 
Nebraska, Kansas, 437 
Oklahoma, Texas, 437 

leasing, 570 

method of figuring costs, 435 

Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, 439 

products, requirements, 39 

summary, 439 
Cereals, imports and exports, 470 
Certificate of title, example, 82-83 
Cheese, carload, 495 

imports and exports, 470 
Cherries, California yields and costs, 432 

carload, 494 

day's work, 553 
Chicago Stock Yards, 476 
Chickens, carload, 495 
Chinese as farm help, 524 
Choosing the employer, 632-633 
Citrus, California yields and costs, 432—433 

highest form of agriculture, 39 

size California groves, 72 
Classification of farming, 48 
Clearing land, costs, Minnesota, Wisconsin, 

Michigan, 457 
Colorado, apple costs, 428 

farm management surveys, 332—333 

horse costs, 463 

implement, 467 



INDEX 



659 



Colorado, investment in orchards, 241 
labor incomes, 201 
. Commercial fertilizers, analyzing, 122 
evidence of value, 128-129 
grades, 122 
pricing, 121-122 
selecting, 121 
use by farmers, 135-138 
Commission houses, 473 
Commission men, legal status, 017-618 
Conditions governing choice of industry, 42-45 
Connecticut, cost of dairy cows, 454 

milk costs, 454 
Co-operative companies, state legislation, Ne- 
braska, 618 
Missouri, 620 
Corn, carload, 496 

costs, California, 428 
Kentucky, 418 
Minnesota, 415 
Missouri, 419 
Nebraska, 414 
South Carolina, Texas, 417 
day's work, 550 
leasing land, 567 
marketing in the Corn Belt, 478 
size of loads, 468 
Cost accounting, classes of records, 373-375 
cashbook, 375 
inventories, 375 
preliminary, 374-375 
closing books, 389-396 

example, 397-403 
comparison with bookkeeping, 342 
cost records, 340 
determining overhead, 396 
feed records, 377 

example, 388-389 
function, 372 
graphic presentation, 341 
household accounts, 385 
indexing, 377 

interpretation of results, 402 
involves estimates, 373 
labor records, 378-384 

examples, 379-385 
manure records, 378 
miscellaneous records, 385 

examples, 389-390 
opening books, 387 
test of value, 397 
time to start, 373 
value, 340 
Costs (.also see Cost of Production), average 
data, 406 
beef, sheep, swine, California, 445-448 
building materials, 217-218 
buildings, Ohio. 213 
clearing land, 457 
dairy equipment, 221 
dairying, California, 448 
detailed apple growing, 429-430 
equipment, California farming, 243 
dairy, 207 
Ohio, 214 



Costs, equipping, apple orchards, 214 
dairy farms, Michigan, 212 

Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, N. 
Carolina, 213 
fattening lambs, 445 
fencing materials. 218-219 
fruit crops, 428-433 
apples, 428-430 
California fruits, 431 — 432 

citrus, 432 
peach, 431 
hauling, U. S. averages, 468 
horses, 461-464 
implements, 215-216 
irrigation equipment, 219-220 
items involved, 404 
keeping a farm work horse, 461 

dairy cows, New Hampshire, Massachu- 
setts, Connecticut, 454 
machinery and implements. 464-467 
marketing. North Dakota wheat, 480 

at Chicago stock yards, 476 
method of making, 413 
minor equipment, 219-200 
of board, 535 
Minnesota, 537 
studies in 10 states, 536 
of field crops, 413-428 
of fruit crops, 428 
of keeping work horses, 460-461 
orchard equipment, 221-222 
poultry equipment, 222 

industry, California, 444 
producing, hogs, Nebraska, Missouri, Wis- 
consin, Iowa, Georgia, 440, 441-442 
Illinois, 438 

Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas, 436 
live stock, 435-448 
method of figuring, 435 
milk, 450-457 

Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, 439 
Oklahoma, Texas, 437 
several states, 437 
summary, 439 
raising, dairy heifers, Ohio, 442-443 

pullets, Indiana, 443-444 
range illustrated, 407 

relation of work to costs, work horses, 461 
spraying, 431 
studying, 404 
tile drainage, 457 
truck crops, 433-434 

California vegetables, 433 
value of cost data, 404 
Costs of production studies (also see Costs), con- 
ducting, 406 
farm manager's interest, 405 
method of making, 408-412 

government, 408-412 
objects, 405 
value, 404 
Cotton, cost, California, 428 
Georgia, 423-424 

Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, Texas, 
422-423 



660 



INDEX 



Cotton, cost, South Carolina, 417 
Texas, 417 
day's work, 550 
leasing land, 568, 573-574 
size of loads, 468 
Country collector, 473 
Cow peas, costs, South Carolina, 417 
Cows, carload, 496 
Crop index, 14 

Crop yields, effect upon income, 290-292 
Cropping rent, 562 
systems, 115 
definition, 115 
example, 116 
Crops, acre, 14 
index, 14 
diversity index, 14 
legal status, 612-613 

liability for damages to, 612-613 
rights of tenants and landlords, 613 
severing, 612 
Cucumbers, carload, 494 
Currants, day's work, 553 
Curtailing wastes, 296-299 



D 



Dairy, equipment costs, 221 

cows, cost of raising heifers, Ohio, 442-443 
depreciation, 207, 356-3.57 

California, 362 

Michigan, 357 

Pennsylvania, 356 
farms, costs of equipping, Michigan, North 
Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, 212, 
213 
labor requirements, 458-459 
leasing, 570-571 

Illinois and Wisconsin, 572 
list of equipment, 201 

costs, 207 
products, imports and exports, 470-471 
Dairying, California cost data, 448-449 
day's work, 555 
labor requirements, 458 
Day's work, conditions governing, 546 
field crops, 549 

alfalfa, 549 

baling, 549 

beans, 550 

corn, 550 

cotton, 550 

flax, 550 

grain, 551 
for implements and machines, 547 
fruits, 552-554 

apples, 553 

apricots, 553 

berries, 553 

cherries, 553 

currants, 553 

cultivation, 552 

grapes, 553 

olives, 554 

peaches, 554 



Day's work, fruits, pears, 554 

prunes, 554 

spraying, 553 

strawberries, 554 

walnuts, 554 
live stock, 555-556 

dairjang, 555 

poultry, 556 

sheep, 556 
miscellaneous, 556-557 

building construction, 556-557 

fencing, 556 

hauling, 557 

irrigating, 557 

poisoning gophers, 557 

sawing wood, 557 

tiling, 557 
rules for determining, 548 
vegetables, 554-555 

asparagus, 554 

cabbage, 554 

cantaloupes, 555 

onions, 555 

peas, 555 

rhubarb, 555 

string beans, 555 

sweet potatoes, 555 

tomatoes, 555 
work stock, 549 
Deed, example, 83-84 
legal definition, 607 
warranty, 609 
Definitions, bill of materials, 166 
calendar of operations, 142 
cropping systems, 115 
deed, 607 
farm, 604 

bookkeeping, 337 
farm management, 1 

manager, 627 
farmer, 603 
farmstead, 176 
financial forecasts, 300 
green manuring, 119 
humus, 119 
inventory, 348 
marketing agencies, 473—474 
rotation of crops, 115 
terms used in farm management, 13 
terms used in market quotations, 501-504 
used in farm tenancy, 559-560 
warranty deed, 609 
Delaware, crop rotations in use, 132 
use of fertilizers, 136 
use of green manures, 138 
Department of Agriculture, Minnesota, 620 

New Jersey, 619 
Depreciation, California figures, 361-362 
dairy cows, 207, 356-357, 361 
determining and prorating in cost accounts, 

392 
farm equipment, 361-362 
horses, 357-360 
machinery, 356, 361-362, .395 
of horses, Illinois, Ohio, Npw York, 459 



INDEX 



661 



Depreciation of horses, Minnesota, 402 
New York, 463 
of implements and machinery, Ohio, New 
York, 465 
Texas, 467 
work horses, 206 
Distributors, 474 
Diversified farms, renting, .599 
Diversified vs. specialized farming (see Special- 
ized vs. Diversified Farming). 
Diversity index, 14 

illustration, 1.5—16 
Diversity, planning to provide, 96 
examples, 96-97 



E 



Eggs (.also see Poultry), carload, 495 

imports and exports, 470 
Empirical method for leasing, 593-599 
advocates, 596-599 
example, 594-595 
objections, 599 
Ensilage, costs, Minnesota, 415 
Enterprise, definition, 13 

Equipment valso see Farm Equipment), apple 
orchard costs, 214 
California farming, 243 
costs, 207-222 
costs, Ohio, 214 
second-hand, 206 
Estate administration, 640 
Exchanges, 474 
Expenses, farm, 13 
Experience, 25 

advantages, 26 
getting experience, 26 
as employee, 27 
as operator, 26 
best way, 30 

changing employment, 30 
from suburban trial, 27 
in partnership, 27 
minimizing, 25 
Experiment station, accepting. fndings, 114 
Exports, effect upon prices, 471-472 
Extensive fa,rming, 45 



Family living, costs, Minnesota, 268 
farm contributions, Nebraska, 268 
important farm contributions, 269, 272 
needs as found in Georgia, 266 
value of farm contributions in various states, 

209 
variable, 273 

Farm bookkeeping, 337 
annual summary, 343 
compared with cost accounting, 342 
cost accounting (see Cost Accounting for de- 
tails), definition, 337 
cost records, value, 340 
extent of record keeping by farmers, 337 
interpretation and use of results, 347 



Farm inventories, 341 
purpose, 338 
records, 348 

annual statement, 368 

cash book, 362 

inventory, 348 
scope, 339 

simple accounts, 339 
simplifying accounts, 345 

application of double entry principle, 345 
technical training, 345 
time element, 344 
types of farm records, 341 
Farm business, agricultural regions of the ITnited 
States, 40 
classification, 48 

demands by different businesses, 36, 39 
factors governing selections, 31 

capital, 32 

examples, 42—45 

income, 33 

locality, 31 

personal inclinations, 34 
in different states, 86-89 
summary of factors governing choice, 46 
Farm, buying and selling, 80-84 
elements of successful farm, 67 
examinations and reports, 73, 74 
factors, 57 

earning capacity, 57 

personal, 57 ' 

finding the farm, 56 
influence of rise in price, 67 
inherent possibilities, 66 
legal definition, 004 
physical factors, 58 

arrangement, 58 

ease and cost of upkeep, 61 

financial, 64 

healthfulness, 60 

improvements, 60 

labor, 64 

markets, 61 

neighbor, 64 

shape, 58 

soil quality, 59 

topography, 59 

waste lands, 61 

water supply, 60 
relation of use to price, 64 
score cards, 74-77 
selecting the farm, high-priced land^ 55 

in established sections, 56 

right land, 55 
valuing, 77-80 
Farm equipment, costs, 208-212 
examples, 155 

buildings, 155 

corn binders, 157 

hog house, 155 

implement, 156 

milking machines, 156 

tractor, 158 
experience in selecting, 154 
factors governing selection, 152 



662 



INDEX 



Farm grouping of items, 154 

influence of environment, 153 
justifying, 155 

lists for selected businesses, 200-206 
P'arm expenses, corn belt study, 236 
Georgia study, 237 
in California farming, 242-244 
in irrigation farming, 241—242 
Pennsylvania study, 233 
Utah study, 235 
Farm income, as shown by farm management 
surveys, 261, 281 
conception of profits, 257 
effect of crop yields upon income, 290 

Kentucky, 290 

Missouri, 291 

Ohio, 291 

Oregon, 290 

survey finds, 292 

Texas, 290 
effect of size of farm area, 277 

Arizona, 279 

corn belt, 278 

eastern Nebraska, 281 

Georgia, 278 

Michigan, 280 

Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota, 279 

Missouri, 280 

New York, 280 

Pennsylvania, 277 
effect of use of land, equipment and labor, 285 

corn belt, 287 
eorgia, 286 

Kentucky, 288 

Michigan, 286 

Pennsylvania, 285 

Texas, 287 

Utah, 286 
effect of working capital upon income, 282 

Arizona, 284 

corn belt, 282 

Kentuckv, 283 

Michigan, 284 

Missouri, 283 

Nebraska, 283 

New York, 282 
estimating, 226 

examples of farm returns, California, 265 
examples of large returns, 264 
examples of profitableness of different enter- 
prises, 94-95 

Iowa, 95 

Ohio, 95 

Texas, 94 

West Virginia, 95 
factors affecting, 275-276 
in determining types of business, 33 
include all productions, 257 
increasing by curtailing wastes, 296 
influence of crop yields, 289 
method of estimating, 259 
per acre, California crops, 263 
producing or purchasing, 93 
quality of business, 289 
should be based on productive value only, 257 



Farm income, terms used, 13 

direct receipts, 13 

farmer's earnings, 13 

indirect receipts, 13 

labor income, 13 

net, 13 

percentage return on investment, 13 

receipts, 13 
value of perquisites, 266 
when greater profit taking is easier, 289 
Farm labor (also see Wages, Supervision, Board, 
Housing, Working Hours), boarding, 
531-537 
bonuses, 542 
classes of farm laborers, 519-525 

Chinese, characteristics and handling, 524 

Hindus, 524 

Hobo, characteristics and handling, 519, 
520 

Indian, 523 

Italians and Portuguese, characteristics 
and handling, 521 

Japanese, characteristics and handling, 521 

Mexican, characteristics and nandling, 522, 
523 

Negro, characteristics and handling, 521 

White, 519 
classes of help needed by farmers, 525-527 

examples of amount of seasonal needs, 527 

examples of time of seasonal needs, 526 
Compensation Act, California, 623 
day's work, 546-557 
handUne. 542-546 
hours, 531 
housing, 537-539 
labor supplies, 558 
legal rights, 611-612 

discharging, 611 

quitting, 611 

relation to farmer, 611, 612 
satisfactory conditions, 531 
students' experiences, 528—530 

adverse comments, 528-530 
the worker's viewpoint, 527 
use of equipment, 558 
wages, 539-542 
Farm law, classification, 602 
commission men, 617 
farm law, 601 

governing farm workers, 611—612 
governing sales, 615-616 
legal definitions, 603 

boundaries, 604 

deed, 607 

farm, 604 

farmer, 603 

waters of farm, 60.5-60 7 
legal status of crops, 612-613 
legal status of live stock, 613-615 
rights of way, 610-61 1 
state legislation, 618 

Arizona, 620 

California, 621-623 

Minnesota, 620 

Missouri, 620 



INDEX 



663 



Farm law, state legislation, Nebraska, 618-619 
New Jersey, 619 
New York, 621 
titles to farm land, 607-610 
unwritten law, 601 
written law, 601 
Farm lease t,see Lease). 
Farm management, changing, 10 

compared with agricultural economics, 3 
definition, 2 
functions, 7 

illustrations, 7-8 
objects, 1, 11 
place, 8 

graphic presentation, 9 
scope, 1 

sources of information, 19 
terms, 13 
Farm management surveys, acreage to provide 
given income, 70-72 
farm practice surveys, 331 
apples, 333 
cotton, 334 
dairy, 333 
potatoes, 333 
poultry, 333 
sugar beets, 332 
Federal, 326-330 
findings on specialized vs. diversified farming, 

53 
incomes as owner or tenant, 262 
list of surveys, 326-334 
possible objection, 316 
sample forms, 316-325 
showing capital requirements of farming, 

239-240 
showing capital requirements of tenant farm- 
ing, 244 
showing effect of crop yields upon income, 

292 
showing effect of live stock returns upon in- 
come, 294 
showing effect of size of farm business upon 

income, 281 
showing effect of various factors upon in- 
come, 295 
showing farm profits, 261 
single year vs. continuous records, 316 
State, 330-331 

use of farmers' estimates, 316 
use, purpose, method of making, 314 
Farm manager, definition, 627 
profit sharing, 643 
salaries, 643-644 
status, 627 
Farm plan, advantages, 85 

influence of local conditions, examples, 86, 
87-89 
corn belt, 89 
Georgia, 87 
Michigan, 88 
Utah, 88 
Farm practice, definition, 13 

local conditions, 21 
Farm profits (see Farm Income). 



Farmer, legal definition, 603 
Farming, as a home, 19 
mode of hfe, 17 
stability, 17 
Farmstead, definition, 13, 176 
plan on paper, 183 

details, 183 
planning new, 176 
rearranging old, 176 
suggestions, 176 
acreage, 179 
axis of barns, 182 
confining stock, 182 
distance between buildings, 180 
grouping buildings, 179 
landscape effects, 182 
lanes, 182 

location and site, 176 
screens, 182 
silos, 182 
variations, 176 
Feedstuff, carload, 496 

Fence equipment (also see Fences), determined 
for general farm, 204 
factors determining kinds, 186 
gates, 188 
kinds in use, 185 
posts, 190 
requirements, 188 
wire, 189 
Fences 'v,Also see Fence Equipment), cost of 
materials, 218-219 
day's work building, 556 
for selected businesses, 200-205 
costs, 208-212 
Field crops (also see Crops), costs, Kentucky: 
corn, tobacco, wheat, rye, hay, 418 
Minnesota: barley, clover, corn, ensilage, 
flaxseed, hay, hemp, mangels, potatoes, 
414-416 
Missouri: corn, oats, wheat, rye, hay, 

sorghums, 418 
Nebraska: corn, wheat, oats, hay, 413-414 
South Carolina: cotton, corn, oats, hay, 

cowpeas, wheat, 417 
Texas: cotton, corn, oats, hay, sorghums, 
417 
requirements, 39 
Fig, California yield and costs, 432 
Financial forecasts, definition, 300 
justification, 300 
limitations, 300 
method of making, 302-306 

examples, 306-313 
object, 300 
Financial test, of the proposed farm proposition, 

65-66 
Flax, day's work, 550 

Florida, crop rotations recommended, 127 
Foremen, selecting, 543 
Fruit, California costs, 431-432 

California legal standards, 621 
costs of producing, 428-433 
day's work, cultivating, 552 
spraying, 553 



664 



INDEX 



Fruit, imports and exports, 470-471 

leasing orchards, 569 

legal requirements for containers, California, 
622 

size of loads, 468 
Fundamentals, of farm management, 12 



Gates, 188 

General farm, lists of equipment, 202 

costs, 209 
Georgia, capital needs, 239-240 

cotton costs, 422-424 

crop rotations for, 127 

diversity of enterprise, 96 

family living, 266 

farm expenses, 237 

farm management surveys, 327, 328 

hog costs, 441-442 

income and size of farm, 278 

income and use of equipment, 286 

labor incomes, 261, 262 

tenants' capital, 245 
Getting a job, 629-640 
Goats, carload, 496 

leasing, 571 
Grain farm, list of equipment, 201 

costs, 209 
Grapes, California yields and costs, 432 

carload, 494 

day's work, 553 
^reen manuring, bacteria, 119 

definition, 119 

evidence of value, 128-129 

humus, 119 

purpose, 119 

recommended for various sections, 127-128 

use by Farm manager, 140 

use by farmers, 138-139 

value of various crops, 120 



H 



Hail insurance, Nebraska, 619 
Hauling, day's work, 557 

loads. United States, 468 
Hay, carload, 496 

costs, California, 428 
Kentucky, 418 
Minnesota, 416 
Missouri, 419 
Nebraska, 414 
South Carolina, 417 
Texas, 417 
leasing land, 568 
size of loads, 468 
Healthfulness, in selecting the farm, 60 
Highways, effect on farm acreage, 62 
Hindus as farm help, 524 
Hoboes as farm help, 519 

Hogs (also see Swine), California cost data, 448 
carload, 496 

cost of producing Nebraska, Missouri, Wis- 
consin, Illinois, Georgia, 440, 441-442 



Hogs, imports and exports, 470 
labor requirements, 458 
leasing, 571 

marketing in Illinois, 476-478 
size of loads, 468 
Hops, cost, California, 428 

day's work, 551 
Horse work unit, 14 

Horses (also see Work Stock), appreciation and 
depreciation, California, 362 

Illinois, Ohio, and New York, 357 

Michigan, 358 

Minnesota, 359 

Missouri, 360 

New York, 359 

Texas, 360 
carload, 496 
costs of keeping, 460-461 

Colorado, 463 

Illinois, 461 

Minnesota, 462 

Missouri, 461-462 

Ohio, New York, 461 

New York, 463 

Texas, 463 
depreciation, 459, 462, 463 
feed requirement, 460 
labor requirements, 458, 459 

Illinois, Ohio, New York, 459 

Missouri, 459 
relation of work to costs, 461 

Illinois, Ohio, New York, 461 
versus tractors, 158-160 
Housing, beds, 538 

condemning poor quarters, 538 

depends on men, 537 

improving helps individual employer, 539 

lights, lockers, ventilation, washing facilities, 

539 
limitations of small employer, 538 
separate rooms, 538 
student findings, 528 

adverse comments, 529 
Humus, definition, 119 
purpose, 120 



I 



Idaho, apple costs, 428 

farm management surveys, 332-333 

investment in orchards, 241 

labor incomes, 261 

use of crop rotations, 134 
Illinois, beef costs, 436-437-438 

capital needs, 239—240 

depreciation of horses, 459 

farm management survey, 326 

horse costs, 461 
depreciation, 357 

labor incomes, 262 

marketing hogs, 476-478 

milk costs, 456 

tenant capital, 245 

use of fertilizers, 137 

use of green manures, 139 



INDEX 



665 



Implements and machinery, annual costs, Ohio, 
465 
Colorado, 467 
Minnesota, 467 
New York, 465 
costs, 215-216 
day's work, 547-548 

rule for determining, 548 
for selected businesses, 200-205 

costs, 208-212 
selection, 193 

use of calendar of operations, example, 
195 
Imports and exports (.also see Exports), 470 

effect of world war upon, 471 
Income (see Farm Income and Profits), acreage 
to produce given income, 69 
California example, 69-70 
influence of productivity, 70 
survey findings, 70-72 
Indiana, apple costs, 430 
beef costs, 437 
capital needs, 239-240 
crop rotations in use, 133 
crop rotations recommended, 127 
farm management surveys, 326, 327 
labor incomes, 261, 262 
milk costs, 456 
pullet costs, 443-444 
tenants' capital, 245 
use of fertilizers, 137 
use of green manures, 139 
Indians as farm help, 523 
Interest, commissions, 254 

costs on implements or machinery, 465-466 
legal rates. Statutes of Limitations, 255 

by States, 255 
prevailing rates, 252 

in various states, 253 
range in rates, 254 
Inventory, definition, 348 

determining inventory values, 351 
crops, 355 
equipment, 355 
live stock, 356 
valuing lands, 352-354 
in cost accounting, 376 
of personal preferences for farm business, 34, 

35 
sample, 349, 352 
taking, 348 
use, 341, 348 
value, 348 
Iowa, beef costs, 436, 437 
capital needs, 239-240 
crop rotations in use, 133 
farm management survey, 325 
hog costs, 440 

incomes from different enterprises, 95 
labor incomes, 261-262 
tenants capital, 245 
use of fertilizers, 137 
use of green manures, 139 
use of perquisites, 270-271 
Irrigation farmers, capital required, 241-242 



Irrigation farmers, day's work, 557 
Italians as farm help, 521 



Japanese as farm help, 523 
Jobbers, 473 

K 

Kansas, beef costs, 436-437-438 
Kentucky, capital needs, 239-240 
costs, 418 
crop rotations, in use, 129-132 

recommended, 128 
farm management surveys, 327, 329, 334 
field crops costs, 418 
income and capital, 283 

and crop yields, 290 

use of equipment, 288 
labor incomes, 261, 265 
perquisites, 266 
tobacco costs, 418 
use of green manures, 139 



Labor (also see Farm Labor), family labor, 14 
handling, 544-546 
horse work unit, 14 
man work unit, 14 
planning, to provide productive work, 97 

to reduce labor requirements, 100 
productive work unit, 14 
requirements, caring for live stock, 458 
of cotton and strawberries (California), 

102-103 
for dairy cows, 458, 459 
for horses, 459 
variation in labor needs, 104 
Labor income, as a measure of profits, 260 
Lambs (see Sheep). 

Land Colonization and Rural Credits Act, Cali- 
fornia, 622 
Land, equipment, labor, effect of use upon in- 
come, 285-288 
Land price, influence of rise, 67 
Landscape, for farmstead, 182 
Law vsee Farm Law). 

Leases, advantages of long term lease, 564-565 
advantages of short term lease, 564-565 
empirical method for prorating income, 593- 
599 
advocates, 596-599 
example, 594—595 
objections, 599 
examples, 575 

cash lease, 575-576 
crop share lease, 576-577 
partnership lease, 577-579 
stock share lease, 579-582 
for diversified farms, 599 
form of lease, 582 

legal requirements, 583 
use of printed blanks, 582 
fundamental factors, 574 



666 



INDEX 



Leases, length depends on conditions, r)6.'5 
long leases, 564 
example, 565 
points to be considered, 583-593 
adjusting differences, 590 
assurances and guarantees by owner, 586 
assurances and guarantees by tenant, 585- 

586 
care of real estate, 589 
credit furnished by landlord, 586 
enforcement, 590 
farming methods, 589 
general details,-583, 584, 591 
insuring enforcement, 590-591 
joint account property, 587 
operating capital, 586-587 
payment of rent, 588 
prorating expenses, 587-588 
reservations, 584-585 
special privileges, 588 
supervision, 589 
termination of lease, 589-590 
standard forms, 591 
the partnership lease, 591—593 

example, 592 
usual length, 563 

short term favored, influence on changing 
tenants, 564 
Lemons (see Citrus), carload, 494, 495 
Letters of application, examples, 633, 634—637 
Lettuce, California costs, 433 
Life insurance companies, as sources of capital, 

247-248 
Literature, on marketing, 514-516 

on tractors, 160 
Live stock, animal unit, 14 

Chicago Stock Yards selling methods, 476 
effect of receipts upon income, 292 
legal status, 613-615 
agistus, 615 
estrays, 613-614 
progeny, 615 
runaways, 615 
manure produced, 123 
productive animal unit, 14 
Loans, paying by amortization, 252 
Looking for a position, 631 



M 



Machinery, assembling and prorating for cost 
accounts, 393 

depreciation, 356, 361, 395 
Maine, rotation in use, 130 

value of perquisites, 271 
Man work unit, 14 
Management, charge for, 258 
Market containers, best, 493 

California legal requirements, 622 

California orange box, 480 

variations, 489 

examples, 491-493 
Market packages (see Market Containers). 
Market quotations, 497-504 

visiting, 486-491 



Market quotations, examples, 501 
measures used, 504 
past quotations a guide to selling, 504 

barley example, 505-506 

eggs example, .506-507 

examples, 508 

how used, 504-508 
reporting prices on basis of past quotations, 

510 
studying, 497-498 
sources of data, 498 
Marketing, agencies, 481 

California legal fruit standards, 621 

Market Commission Act, 621 
carload lots, 493-496 
charting methods, 483-485 
choosing the method, 482 
desirability of knowing methods, 469 
farm products, 475—481 

California oranges, 480 

Chicago Stock Yards, 476 

Corn Belt corn, 478 

Illinois hogs, 476-478 

North Dakota wheat, 478-480 
holding for high prices, 508 

examples, 508 
imports and exports, 470-471 

selected products, 470-471 
influence of weather, 480 
literature, 514-516 
market trend, 474 
past quotations a guide, 504 
prorating the consumer's dollar, 508 

apples, 511 

onions, 512 

oranges, 510-511 
studying systems, 486-488 
system sound, 485 
terms, 473 
Maryland, crop rotations in use, 132 
use of fertilizers, 136 
use of green manures, 138 
Massachusetts, cost of dairy cows, 454 

milk costs, 454 
Mexicans as farm help, 522 
Michigan, capital needs, 239-240 

of tenants, 245 
crop rotations recommended, 127 
dairy farm equipment, 212, 213 
depreciation of dairy cows, 357 
farm management surveys, 327, 328, 329, 

332 
income and capital, 284 
income and live stock, 293 
income and use of equipment, 286 
labor incomes, 261 
milk costs, 450 
Milk, cost of producing, Indiana, 456 

Ilhnois, 456 

Michigan, 450 

Minnesota, 452-454 

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecti- 
cut, 454 

New York, 455 

Vermont, 451 



INDEX 



667 



Milk, cost of producing, Wisconsin, Michigan, 
Pennsylvania, North Carolina, 451 
imports and exports, 470 
reference, 457 
Milking machines, justifying purchase, 156 
Minimum efficient unit, 68 
Minnesota, beef costs, 437 
capital needs, 239-240 

of tenants, 245 
clearing land costs, 457 
costs of board, 537 
Department of Agriculture, 620 
depreciation of horses, 358, 462 
ensilage costs, 415 
family living, 268 
farm management survey, 327 
field crops costs, 415, 416 
horse costs, 462 

depreciation, 359 
implement costs, 467 
income and live stock, 294 
income and size of farm, 279 
labor incomes, 261, 262, 265 
milk costs, 452-454 
perquisites, 268 
state legislation, 620 
Minor equipment, costs, 200, 219-220 
for selected businesses, 201-206 

costs, 208-212 
list, 198 
selecting, 198 
Mississippi, crop rotations in use, 132 
crop rotations recommended, 127 
use of fertilizers, 136 
Missouri, beef costs, 436, 437, 438 
capital needs, 239-240 

of tenants, 245 
co-operative companies, 620 
farm management surveys, 328, 330 
field crop costs, 419 
hog costs, 440 
horse costs, 461-462 
depreciation, 360 
income and capital, 283 
and crop yields, 291 
and labor, 98 
and size of farm, 280 
labor incomes, 261, 262, 264 
perquisites, 266 
state legislation, 620 
Montana, capital needs, 239-240 
of tenants, 245 
farm management surveys, 330, 331 
labor incomes, 261, 262, 265 
use of crop rotations, 133 
"Monthly Crop Reporter," 500 

"The Bureau of Markets Reporter," 500- 
501 
Mortgages, crop and stock, 251 
example, 251 
factors influencing, 249-250 
percentage held by banks and life insurance 
companies, 248 
Mules, carload, 496 



N 



Nebraska, beef costs, 436, 437, 438 
capital needs, 239-240 

of tenants, 245 
co-operative companies, 618 
diversity of enterprises, 97 
family living, 268 
farm managem.ent surveys, 331 
field crop costs, 413-414 
hail insurance, 619 
hog costs, 440 
income and capital, 283 
and labor, 99 
and size of farm, 281 
labor incomes, 261, 262 
state legislation, 618-619 
value perquisites, 270, 271 
Negroes as farm help, 521 
New Hampshire, capital needs, 239-240 
cost of dairy cows, 454 
farm management surveys, 326 
labor incomes, 261 
milk costs, 454 
New Jersey, capital needs, 239-240 
of tenants, 245 
crop rotations in use, 131 
department of agriculture, 619 
farm management surveys, 331, 333 
labor incomes, 261, 262 
state legislation, 619 
use of fertilizers, 136 

of green manures, 138 
value of perquisites, 271 
New Mexico, use of green manures, 139 
New York, apple costs, 428-429 
capital needs, 239-240 

of tenants, 245 
crop rotations in use, 130 

of implements, 465 
depreciation of horses, 459, 463 
farm management surveys, 330, 333 
horse costs, 461 

depreciation, 357, 359 
implement costs, 465 
income and capital, 282 
and size of farm, 280 
labor incomes, 261, 262, 265 
milk costs, 455 
state legislation, 463, 621 
use of fertilizers, 135 
use of green manures, 138 
value perquisites, 270, 271 
Non-productive land, 62 

North Carolina — dairy farm equipment, 213 
milk costs, 451 
rotations in use, 132 
use of fertilizers, 137 

of green manures, 139 
value of perquisites, 270, 271 
North Dakota, marketing wheat, 480 
value of perquisites, 271 

O 
Oats, carload, 496 

cost, California, 428 



668 



INDEX 



Oats, Missouri, 419 
Nebraska, 414 
South Carolina, 417 
Texas, 417 
day's work, 551 
size of loads, 468 
Ohio, building costs, 213 
capital needs, 240 
cost of tile drains, 457 
crop rotations in use, 133 

recommended, 127 
depreciation of horses, 357, 459 

of implements, 465 
equipment costs, 214 

farm management surveys, 329, 330, 332 
heifer costs, 442-443 
horse costs, 461 
implement costs, 465 
income and crop yields, 291 
incomes from different enterprises, 95 
labor incomes, 261 
perquisites, 266 
use of fertilizers, 137 

of green manures, 139 
value of perquisites, 270, 271 
Oklahoma, beef costs, 437 
Olives, California yields and costs, 432 
Onions, amount of consumer's dollar received by 
farmer, 512 
California costs, 433, 434 
day's work, 555 
leasing land, 569 
Oranges (also see Citrus), amount of consumers' 
dollar received by farmer, 510-511 
carload, 494, 495 

marketing CaHfornia oranges, 480 
Orchard, equipment costs, 221-222 

list of equipment, 200 
Oregon, apple costs, 428 
capital needs, 239-240 
farm management surveys, 329, 333 
incomes and crop yields, 290 
investment in orchards, 241 
labor incomes, 261 
use of crop rotations, 134 
fertilizers, 137 
Organizing the farm business, choosing the profit- 
able enterprise, 94 
examples, 94 
Iowa, 95 
Ohio, 95 
Texas, 94 
West Virginia, 95 
for immediate capital, 92 
gathering data, 111 

sources. 111 
individual need, 91 
local practice, 89 

planning the reorganization of going con- 
cerns, 106-110 
suggestions, 106-110 
producing or purchasing, 93 
special program, 110 

to produce family and farm supplies, 104 
fruits, examples, 106 



Organizing the farm business, to produce vege- 
tables, plan for middle cotton belt, size 
necessary, 104, 105, 106 
to provide days of productive labor, exam- 
ples, 97 
Missouri, 98 
Nebraska, 99 
Pennsylvania, 97 
to provide diversity, 96 
Georgia, Pennsylvania; 96 
Nebraska, 97 
to reduce labor requirements, 97 

examples, California, several states, 100, 

101 
variations, 104 
use of a farm plan, 85 



Packers, 474 

"Paper Farm" (see Financial Forecasts). 

Peaches, California yields and costs, 432 

carload, 494 

costs. West Virginia, 431 
' method of growing and data, California, 144 
Pears, California yields and costs, 432 

carload, 494, 495 
Peas, carload, 494 

cost, California, 428 

day's work, 551 

leasing land, 570 
Pennsylvania, alfalfa growing methods, 143 

capital needs, 239-240 

crop rotations in use, 131 

dairy farm equipment, 213 

depreciation of dairy cows, 356 

diversity of enterprises, 96 

farm expenses, 233 

farm management surveys, 326, 330 

horse depreciation, 358 

income and labor, 97 

income and live stock, 293 
and size of farm, 277 
and use of equipment, 285 

labor incomes, 261, 262, 264 

milk costs, 451 

tenants' capital, 245 

timothy and clover growing methods, 143 

use of fertilizers, 135 
of green manures, 138 

value of perquisites, 270, 271 

work days, 146 
Perquisites, Arizona, 266 

Georgia, 266 

Kentucky, 266 

Missouri, 266 

Nebraska, 266 

Ohio, 266 

Utah, 266 

value, 266 
Personal effects, for selected businesses, 201-206 

costs, 208-212 
Personal elements for farming success, 23 
Personal, inclination in determining type of 
business, 33 
use of inventory, 34, 35 



INDEX 



669 



Personal, in selecting the farm, 57, 67 

test questions in selecting the farm, 68 
Personal interview, 638 
Plums, California yields and costs, 432 

carload, 494, 495 
Poisoning gophers, day's work, 557 
Portuguese as farm help, 521 
Potatoes, cost, California, 428 
Minnesota, 416 

day's work, 551 

leasing land, 569 

size of loads, 468 
Poultry, cost data, California, 444 

costs of raising pullets, Indiana, 443-444 

day's work, 556 

depreciation, California, 362 

equipment costs, 222 

leasing, 571 
Poultry farm, list of equipment, 202 
Prices, effect of export, 471'-472 
Productive land, woodland, 61, 63 
Profits (see Farm Income). 
Prorating the consumer's dollar, 510-512 
Prunes, California yields and costs, 432 

R 
Receiver, 473 

References, to method conducting cost of milk 
production study, 457 
used in book, 647-655 
Reorganizing going concerns, 106 
suggestions, 107 

change in crop, 107 
financing, 109 
improving soil quality, 108 
increasing acreage, 107 
increasing yields, 110 
introduction of live stock, 107 
providing irrigation, 109 
reducing operating expenses, 110 
use of tractor, 109 
utilizing labor, 108 
Repairs, costs on implements and machinery, 465 
Retail prices, compared with farmer's receipts, 512 

reasons for spread, 512—513 
Reviewing going concerns, 641-643 

fees, 642 
Rhubarb, day's work, 555 
Rice, cost, California, 428 

size of loads, 468 
Rights of way, 610-611 
located, 610 
naked, 610 
retaining, 610-611 
Rotation of crops, arranging fields, 118 
definition, 115 
evidence of value, 128-129 
example, 116 
recommended rotations for various sections, 

124-127 
rules, 116 

use by farm managers, 140 
use by farmers, 130-135 
Rye, carload, 496 

costs, Kentucky, Missouri, 418, 419 



Safety factor, in estimating capital needs, 228 
Salaries, farm managers, 643-644 
reviewing going concerns, 642 
utilizing, 644 
Sales, essentials, 615 

legal status, 615-616 
warehouse receipts, 615 
warranty, 616 
Score cards, of farmers, 74-77 
Selecting the farm business (see Farm Business). 
Selling farm lands (see Buying and Selling Farm 

Lands). 
Selling, past Quotations a guide, 504 
Selling service, 629-640 

choosing the employer, 632-633 
employer's requirements, 629-630 
looking for a position, 631-632 
references and testimonials, 639 
selling ability, C39-640 
the application, 633-638 
the interviewer, 638-639 
value of college training, 630-631 
Share vs. cash rent, 562 
Share rent, 562 

Sheep, California cost data, 447 
carload, 496 

cost of fattening lambs, 445 
day's work, 556 
depreciation, California, 362 
imports and exports, 470 
labor requirements, 458 
leasing, 571 
Shipper, 473 
Size of business, as affecting income, 277 

influence of farm area and data from several 

states, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281 
ways of increasing, 288 
Size of farm, California business, 73 
ideal size, 69 
minimum efficient unit, 68 

relatively small, 69 
to produce given income, 69 
Arkansas, 72 
California citrus, 72 
influence of productivity, 70 
irrigation districts, 72-73 
survey findings, 70 
Sinking fund, 258 
Soil quality, importance, 113 
in selecting the farm, 59 
ways of improving, 114 
justifying, 115 
Sorghum, cost, California, 428 
costs, Texas, 417 
day's work, 551 
South Carolina, capital needs, 239-240 
cotton costs, 417, 422-423 
farm management survey, 328 
field crop costs, 417 
labor incomes, 261 
rotations in use, 132 
use of fertilizers, 136 
se of green manures, 137 



670 



INDEX 



South Dakota, beef costs, 437 
Soybeans, costs, Missouri, 419 
Space, allotments for buildings, 174 
Specialized farm, definition, 13 
Specialized is. diversified farming, 47 

advantages of diversified farming, 50 

advantages of specialized farming, 50 

comparison, 51 

general farming for beginners, 54 

general farming more exacting, 54 

survey findings, 53—54 

tendency towards specialized, 51 
Speculation, 473 
Spinach, California costs, 433 

Stable manures, amount produced by live stock, 
123 

cash value, 122 

classification, 123 

composition, 122 

evidence of value, 128-129 

handling, 123 

limitations, 123 

physical value, 123 

use by farm managers, 140 

use by farmers, 135-138 

using, 123 
Standing rent, 562 

State Market Commission Act, California, 621 
Steers (.also see Beef), method of figuring costs, 

435 
Stock beets, day's work, 551 
Straw, carload, 496 
String beans, day's work, 555 
Student experiences as farm laborers, 527 
Sugar beets, cost, California, 428 
various states, 419-422 

day's work, 551 

leasing land, 569 
Supervision, handling men, 544-545 

personal qualities, 543 

relation employer to men, 544 

selecting foremen, 543 

student findings, 528 
adverse comments, 530 
Surveys (.see Farm Management Surveys). 
Sweet peas, day's work, 551 
Sweet potatoes, California costs, 434 

day's work, 555 
Swine (.see Hogs). 



Tenancy, cash rent, 14 
cropper, 14 
effects of and of farm business upon incomes, 

280 
effects of capital upon incomes, 284 
effects of quality upon incomes, 291 
fundamental factors, 574 
incomes compared with ownership, 262, 280, 

284 
justification for, 560-561 
kinds of tenant, 561-562 
cash rent, 562 
cropping rent, 562 



Tenancy, kinds of tenant, siiare cash rent, 562 
share rent, 562 
standing rent, 562 
landlord, 14 
lease forms, 575-593 

leasing practices in United States, 566-572 
cotton belt, 573-574 
dairies, 571-572 
field crops, 567-569 
fruits, 569 
general farms, 572 
live stock, 570-571, 572 
pasture, 571 
share rent, 14 
stock ranches, 572 
truck crops, 569-570 
length of tenure, 563-566 
owner, 14 
part owner, 14 

preferences for cAsh and share rents, 563 
share rent, 14 
tenant, 14 
terms used, 559-560 
when to rent, 55 
Tenant, capital required by tenant, California. 
245 
capital required by tenant, survey data, 24 o 
Tennessee, crop rotations in use, 129, 132 
crop rotations recommended, 127 
use of green manures, 139 
Terms, used in farm management, 13-15 

illustration, 15 
Testimonials, 639 

Testing a proposed farm business, 302- 313 
method, 302-306 
example, 306-313 
Texas, beef costs, 437 

capital needs, 239-240 
cotton costs, 417, 422-423 
depreciation of implements, 467 
farm management surveys, 328, 329 
field crops costs, 417 
horse costs, 463 
horse depreciation, 360 
incomes and crop yields, 290 
incomes and use of equipment, 287 
incomes from various enterprises, 94 
labor incomes, 261 
value of perquisites, 271, 270 
Tile drain, costs, Ohio, 457 

day's work, 557 
Timothy and clover, method of growing, Penn- 
sylvania, 143 
Titles to land, accession, 608 
deed, 609 
escrow, 608 
grant, 607 
kinds, 607 
prescription, 608 
will, 608 
Tobacco, costs, Kentucky, 418 

size of loads, 468 
Tomato, California costs, 433, 434 
carload, 494 
day's work, 555 



INDEX 



671 



Tomato, leasing lands, 570 

Utah costs, 434 
Topography, of the farm, 59 
Tractor, justifying purchase, 158 

literature, 160 

vs. horses, 158-160 
Truck crops, leasing lands, 5C9 
Type of farming, affecting profits, 276 

U' 

Unearned increment, 273 

Unwritten law, 601 

Utah, capital needs, 239-240 

capital needs of tenants, 245 

crop rotations for, 126 

crop rotations in use, 133 

day's work, 146 

farm expenses, 235 

farm management surveys, 326, 328, 331, 332 

income and use of equipment, 286 

labor incomes, 261 

perquisites, 266 



V 



Value of college training, 630-631 
Valuing farm lands, factors determining value, 77 
bases, 353 
home value, 78 
potential, 79 
productive value, 78 
examples, 78-79 
for inventory purposes, 352 
cost, 353 

effect of appreciation, 355 
market, 353 
orchards, 354 
rent, 353 
for purchase, 77 
good and bad lands, 79 
Vegetable growing, requirements, 39 
Vegetables, size of loads, 468 
Vermont, milk costs, 451 

value of perquisites, 270, 271 
Virginia, crop rotations in use, 132 

use of fertilizers, 136 
Volunteer hay, requirements, 39 



W 



Wages, bonuses or premiums, 542 

paying, 541-542 

student findings, 528 

U. S. averages, 539 

regional variations, 540-541 

value of board, 541 
Walnuts, California yields and costs, 432 
Warehouse receipts, 615 
Warranty deed, 609 
Washington, apple costs, 428 

farm management surveys, 333 

investment in orchards, 241 



Washington, labor incomes, 261 
use of crop rotations, 134 
use of fertilizers, 137 
use of green manures, 139 
Waste lands, 61 

permanent and temporary, 02 

in United States, 63 
poor pastime, 64 
Watermelons, carload, 494 
Water supply, in selecting the farm, 60 
Waters, legal definition, 605 
Riparian, 606 
underground, 607 
West Virginia, crop rotations in use, 132 
farm management surveys, 330 
incomes from different enterprises, 95 
peach costs, 431 
use of green manures, 139 
What the business should pay, 257 
Wheat, carload, 496 

cost, California 428 
Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Minnesota, 
South Dakota, 424-426 
Nebraska, South Carolina, Kentucky, 

Missouri, 414-419 
North Dakota, 424-426 
day's work, 551 
leasing lands, 567 

marketing — North Dakota, 478-480 
method of growing, Pennsylvania, 143 
size of loads, 468 
Wholesale merchant, 473 
Wisconsin, capital needs, 239-240 
clearing land costs, 457 
dairy farm equipment, 213 
farm management surveys, 327 
hog costs, 440 
income and live stock, 292 
income and size of farm, 279 
milk costs, 451 
value of perquisites, 270, 271 
Wood, day's work sawing, 557 
Woodland, 63 
Wool, size of loads, 468 
Work days, available, Arkansas, 145 
available, Pennsylvania, 146 
available, Utah, 146 
Work schedule (see Calendar of Operations). 
Work stock, day's work, 549 
depreciation, 206 
for selected businesses, 200-205 

costs, 208-212 
mating, 193 
number required, 193 

use of calendar of operations, 196 
example, 196 
selection, 191 
working, 193 
Working capital, effect of amount upon income, 

282-284 
Working hours, average length. United States, 531 
Workmen's Compensation Act, California, 623 
Written law, 601 



